Division  771 

DA  783.4  . M3 9  1909 
Maxwell,  Herbert, 

Robert  the  Bruce  and  the 
struggle  for  Scottish 


[Dr 


Heroes  of  the  Nations 

A  Series  of  Biographical  Studies 
presenting  the  lives  and  work 
of  certain  representative  his¬ 
torical  characters,  about  whom 
have  gathered  the  traditions 
of  the  nations  to  which  they 
belong,  and  who  have,  in  the 
majority  of  instances,  been 
accepted  as  types  of  the  sev¬ 
eral  national  ideals. 


FOR  FULL  LIST  SEE  END  OF  THIS  VOLUME 


Iberoes  of  tbe  IRatlons 


EDITED  BY 

Evelyn  Hbbott,  /ffi.H. 

FELLOW  OF  BALLIOL  COLLEGE,  OXFORD 


FACTA  DUCIS  VIVENT,  OPEROSAQUE 
GLORIA  RERUM. —  OVID,  IN  LIVIAM,  265. 

THE  HERO’S  DEEDS  AND  HARD-WON 
FAME  SHALL  LIVE. 


ROBERT  THE  BRUCE 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2018  with  funding  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


/ 


https://archive.org/details/robertbrucestrug00maxw_0 


LOCH  TROOL. 

(. From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros Dundee .) 


Robert  the  Bruce 


AND  THE  STRUGGLE  FOR  SCOTTISH 

INDEPENDENCE 


v  BY 

SIR  HERBERT  MAXWELL,  Bart.,  M.P. 

AUTHOR  OF  “MERIDIANA,”  “LIFE  OF  W.  H.  SMITH’* 
“SCOTTISH  LANDNAMKS,"  BTC. 


G.  P.  PUTNAM’S  SONS 

NEW  YORK  LONDON 

27  WEST  TWENTY-THIRD  STREET  24  BEDFORD  STREET,  STRAND 

guicherbother  |jrrsa 

I9°9 


Copyright,  1897,  by 
G.  P.  PUTNAM’S  SONS 
Entered  at  Stationers’  Hall,  London 


Ube  •Rnicfcevbocfcer  lpress,  IRew  H2orfe 


BY  THE  GRACIOUS  PERMISSION 
OF 

His  Royal  Highness 

Blbert  ]£&war&, 

PRINCE  OF  WALES  and  EARL  OF  CARRICK, 

THIS  WORK  IS 

MOST  RESPECTFULLY  DEDICATED  TO  HIM 

by  the  Author. 


PREFACE  TO  SECOND  EDITION. 


I  HAVE  been  charged  with  want  of  patriotism  in 
writing  too  confidently  about  the  homage  ex¬ 
acted  from  Malcolm  Canmore  for  Lothian  and 
Cambria.  In  spite  of  the  close  attention  which  has 
been  devoted  during  the  last  hundred  and  fifty 
years  to  this  delicate  point,  unanimity  among  his¬ 
torical  students  seems  as  far  off  as  ever.  In  the  first 
edition  I  gave  the  impression  of  probability  left  on 
my  mind  after  comparison  of  every  leading  authority, 
namely,  that  Lothian— the  territory  lying  along  the 
east  coast  between  the  Tweed  and  the  Forth — was 
not  reckoned  an  integral  part  of  Scotland  in  the 
eleventh  century.  That  this  view  does  not  imply 
want  of  patriotism  surely  appears  clear  when  it  is 
seen  to  have  been  the  one  adopted  by  such  able 
advocates  of  Scottish  nationality  as  Heron  in  the 
last  century  and  Skene  in  the  present  one. 

However,  as  it  is  almost  certain  that  the  doubt 
hanging  round  this  venerable  dispute  can  never  be 
dispelled,  I  have  taken  this  opportunity  of  modifying 
the  references  to  the  Lothian  homage  in  such  a  way 


V 


vi  Preface  to  Second  Edition . 

as  to  avoid  unnecessary  controversy.  The  fact  re¬ 
mains  that  the  Scottish  Kings  were  content  to  pay 
homage  for  English  fiefs;  the  precise  extent  and 
locality  of  those  fiefs  it  is  impossible  to  define. 

Indignant  remonstrance  has  been  addressed  to  me 
for  having  suggested  the  identity  of  William  Wallace 
with  William  le  Waleys  who,  in  company  with  a 
priest,  was  alleged  to  have  stolen  3^  worth  of  beer 
from  a  woman  in  Perth.  It  is  fair  to  point  out  that 
the  charge  never  was  brought  to  proof ;  even  had  it 
been  so,  it  would  have  sunk  into  insignificance  be¬ 
side  the  many  cold-blooded  crimes  with  which  Blind 
Harry  proudly  credits  his  hero.  It  is  certainly  a 
curious  coincidence  that  Blind  Harry  states  that 
Wallace  was  in  Perth,  disguised  as  a  priest ,  just 
about  the  time  the  theft  was  committed. 

It  has  been  pointed  out  that  in  following  the 
version  of  the  Bruce  pedigree,  compiled  by  Miss 
Cumming-Bruce,  I  am  at  variance  with  some  other 
writers  who  have  attained  greater  proficiency  than  I 
can  lay  claim  to  in  Norman  genealogy.  Mr.  J.  H. 
Round  points  out  that  while  the  de  Brus  family 
came  from  the  Chateau  d’Adam  at  Brix,  near  Cher¬ 
bourg,  the  house  of  de  Braose,  which  obtained  lands 
in  Sussex,  originated  at  Briouze,  in  the  south  of 
Normandy. 

Mr.  William  Brown,  in  a  paper  on  “  The  Brus 
Cenotaph  at  Guisborough  ”  (Yorkshire Archeological 
Journal ,  1895,  vol.  xiii.,  pp.  226-261),  gives  the  fol¬ 
lowing  pedigree  of  the  family  of  Brus  of  Skelton  and 
Annandale,  in  which  it  will  be  seen  that  the  first  two 


Preface  to  Second  Edition . 


Vll 


Roberts  given  in  my  version  of  the  pedigree  (p.  18) 
and  in  the  Dictionary  of  National  Biography,  are 
returned  as  one.  The  cenotaph  at  Guisborough 
cannot  be  considered  as  earlier  than  the  sixteenth 
century. 

London,  July  i,  1897. 


Robert  de  Brus,  came  to  England  after 
1086-7.  Present  at  the  Battle  of  the 
Standard.  =  ASnes  PayneL 


Adam  de  Brus,  head  of 
the  line  of  Skelton. 


Robert  de  Brus. 


Robert  de  Brus,  died  before  1191. 


Euphemia,  niece  of 
William  le  Gros, 
Earl  of  Albemarle. 

Isabel,  daughter  of 
William  the  Lion. 


Robert  de  Brus,  died  without  issue. 
William  de  Brus,  died  about  1215. 


Christiana. 


Robert  de  Brus,  died  1245.  -  Isabel,  dau.  of  David,  Earl  of 

Huntingdon. 


Robert  de  Brus,  the  Competitor,  , 

died  1295.  =  (0  Isabel>  dau*  Gilbert  de 

Clare,  Earl  of  Gloucester,  (2) 
Christiana  de  Ireby. 


Robert  de  Brus,  died  1304. 


Margaret,  dau.  of  Nigel,  Earl 
of  Carrick. 


King  Robert  Bruce. 


IX 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

INTRODUCTION . 1 

CHAPTER  I. 

THE  MAKING  OF  SCOTLAND  (a.D.  844-1286)  .  .  1-1 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE  DISPUTED  SUCCESSION  (a.D.  1286-1291)  .  .  38 

CHAPTER  III. 

THE  REIGN  OF  JOHN  DE  BALLIOL  (a.D.  1291-1296)  6 2 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  CAMPAIGN  OF  WALLACE  (a.D.  1296-1298)  .  82 

CHAPTER  V. 

THE  DEATH  OF  WALLACE  (a.D.  1299-1305)  .  .  IOI 

CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  REVOLT  OF  ROBERT  DE  BRUS  (a.D.  1304-1306).  120 


Xl 


•  • 
XU 


Contents. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


ADVENTURES  OF  THE  KING  OF  SCOTS  (a.D.  1306 

1307 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

DEATH  OF  EDWARD  I.  CAMPAIGNS  OF  EDWARD  II. 

(a.d.  1307-1313) . 

CPIAPTER  IX. 

BATTLE  OF  BANNOCKBURN  (a.D.  1314)  • 

CHAPTER  X. 

INVASION  OF  ENGLAND  AND  IRELAND  BY  THE 
SCOTS  (A.D.  1314-1317)  . 

CHAPTER  XI. 

CONTINUED  SUCCESS  OF  THE  SCOTTISH  ARMS  (a.D. 

I3l6-i3i9)  . 


CPIAPTER  XII. 

INVASION  AND  COUNTER-INVASION  (a.D.  1319-1322) 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

NEGOTIATIONS  FOR  PEACE  (a.D.  1322-1326)  . 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

THE  CAMPAIGN  OF  WEARDALE  AND  CONCLUSION 
OF  PEACE  (A.D.  1327-1328)  • 


PAGE 

137 


163 


194 


224 


245 


263 


287 


3°5 


Contents. 


chapter  xv. 

DEATH  OF  THE  QUEEN  OF  SCOTS  AND  MARRIAGE 
OF  THE  PRINCE  (a.D.  1328)  . 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

DEATH  OF  ROBERT  DE  BRUS.  REVIEW  OF  HIS 
WORK  AND  CHARACTER  (a.D.  I329) 

CHAPTER  XVII. 

EXPEDITION  OF  DOUGLAS.  HIS  DEATH,  AND  THAT 
OF  MORAY  (A.D.  1329-1332)  • 

INDEX  . 


xiii 

PAGE 

329 

337 

356 

37i 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


PAGE 

loch  trool  ......  Frontispiece 

THE  ABBEY  CRAIG  AND  WALLACE  MONUMENT,  SCENE 
OF  THE  BATTLE  OF  STIRLING,  SEPTEMBER  II, 

1297  ...••••• 


DIRLETON  CASTLE  . 
CAERLAVEROCK  CASTLE  . 
DUMFRIES 

KILDRUMMIE  CASTLE 
“  THE  ROCK  OF  BLOOD.” 


SITE  OF  THE  CASTLE  OF 


DUNAVERTY  ...•••* 
MAP  OF  GALLOWAY 

LOCH  TROOL  NEAR  NEWTON  STUART 

From  a  photograph  by  Mr.  Hunter. 

BOTHWELL  CASTLE  ON  THE  CLYDE  .... 
CLACKMANNAN  CASTLE,  THE  RESIDENCE  OF  ROBERT 
IN  1314  ....•••* 

STIRLING  CASTLE,  FROM  THE  SOUTH-WEST 
MAP  OF  BANNOCKBURN  ....•• 
BOTHWELL  CASTLE,  THE  QUADRANGLE  . 
DUNBARTON  CASTLE  ....•• 
TARBET  CASTLE  ON  LOCH  FYNE  • 

DUNFERMLINE  ABBEY.  REFECTORY 
DUNFERMLINE  ABBEY,  FROM  THE  NORTH-EAST 


92 

96 

106 

130 

138 

144 

I52 

160 

164 

192 

196 

2l6 

224 

298 

3°° 

330 

342 


XV 


XVI 


Illustrations . 


PAGE 

DUNFERMLINE  ABBEY.  NAVE,  LOOKING  EAST  .  .  344 

CAMBUSKENNETH  ABBEY . .  34$ 

MELROSE  ABBEY  FROM  THE  SOUTH-EAST  .  .  .  356 

TOMB  OF  SIR  JAMES  DOUGLAS  .....  3^2 

From  Fraser’s  The  Douglas  Book ,  Edinburgh,  1895. 

For  the  subjects  not  otherwise  specified,  the  illustrations  have  been 
reproduced,  with  permission,  from  photographs  by  Messrs.  Valentine 
Bros.,  Dundee. 


COINS  AND  SHIELDS. 

SILVER  PENNY  OF  JOHN  DE  BALLIOL 

From  a  cast  in  the  British  Museum. 

SILVER  PENNY  OF  ROBERT  I.  . 

From  a  cast  in  the  British  Museum. 

THE  KING  OF  SCOTLAND  .... 

THE  KING  OF  ENGLAND  .... 

SIR  JOHN  DE  BALLIOL  .... 

SIR  ROBERT  DE  BRUS  .... 

COMYN,  EARL  OF  BUCHAN 

SIR  AYMER  DE  VALENCE  .... 

SIR  HENRY  DE  PERCY  .... 

SIR  ROBERT  DE  CLIFFORD 

SIR  JOHN  DE  MAXWELL  .... 

SIR  INGELRAM  DE  UMFRAVILLE 
THE  EARL  OF  GLOUCESTER 
SIR  ROGER  DE  KIRKPATRICK  . 

SIR  JOHN  DE  ST.  JOHN  .... 
MURDOCH  OF  CUMLODEN  .... 
PATRICK,  EARL  OF  DUNBAR  AND  MARCH  . 

SIR  DOUGAL  MACDOUALL  OF  GALLOWAY  . 

SIR  GILBERT  DE  CLARE,  EARL  OF  GLOUCESTER 


PAGE 

I 


17 

17 

38 

38 

62 

62 

82 

82 

IOI 

IOI 

120 

120 

137 

137 

163 

163 

194 


Illustrations.  xvii 


PAGE 

SIR  GILES  DE  ARGENTINE . 194 

SIR  HUMPHREY  DE  BOHUN  .....  224 

SIR  PHILIP  DE  MOUBRAY . 224 

SIR  WALTER  THE  STEWARD  .....  263 

SIR  THOMAS  GRAY  OF  HETOUN  ....  263 

SIR  JOHN  OF  BRITTANY,  EARL  OF  RICHMOND  .  .  287 

SIR  HUGH  LE  DESPENSER . 287 

THOMAS,  EARL  OF  MORAY  .....  305 

SIR  JAMES  DE  DOUGLAS . 3°5 

THE  EARLS  OF  CARRICK . 329 

SIR  HUGH  LE  DESPENSER . 329 

SIR  HUGH  DE  MORTIMER,  EARL  OF  MARCH  .  .  337 

JOHN,  EARL  OF  WARENNE  AND  SURRY  .  .  .  337 

THOMAS,  EARL  OF  LANCASTER  ....  356 

SIR  RICHARD  FITZ  ALAN,  EARL  OF  ARUNDEL  .  .  356 

SIR  SIMON  DE  FRASER . 370 


The  shields  are  reproduced  from  drawings  by  Mr.  Graham  John¬ 
ston,  of  the  Lyon  Office,  Edinburgh. 


(// 


. 


► 


ABBREVIATED  REFERENCES  TO  AUTHORITIES. 


Bain. — Calendar  of  Documents  relating  to  Scotland  preserved  in 
H.  M.  Public  Record  Office.  Edited  by  Joseph  Bain. 
4  vols.  H.  M.  General  Register  House,  Edinburgh. 

Hailes.— Annals  of  Scotland,  by  Lord  Hailes.  Ed.  1797.  3  vols. 

Lanercost. — Chronicon  de  Lanercost.  Maitland  Club.  Edin¬ 
burgh.  1839. 

Palgrave. — Documents  and  Records  illustrating  the  History  of 
Scotland  preserved  in  the  Treasury.  Collected  and  edited  by 
Sir  Francis  Palgrave.  Published  by  the  Records  Com¬ 
missioners.  1837. 

Raine.  —Historical  letters  and  papers  from  the  Northern  Registers. 
Edited  by  James  Raine.  Master  of  the  Rolls  series.  1873. 

Stevenson. — Documents  illustrative  of  the  History  of  Scotland, 
1286-1306.  Selected  and  arranged  by  the  Rev.  Joseph 
Stevenson.  H.  M.  General  Register  House.  Edinburgh, 
1870. 

Scalacronica. — Scalacronica  :  by  Sir  Thomas  Gray  of  Heton, 
Knight.  A  Chronicle  of  England  and  Scotland  from  A.D. 
MLXVI  to  A.D.  MCCCLXII.  Edinburgh,  printed  for  the 
Maitland  Club.  1836. 


xix 


- 


.  .. 


r 


■ 

Silver  Penny  of  John  de  Balliol. 
Obv:  The  King’s  head  crowned,  and 
sceptre,  iohannes  :  dei  :  gra»{« 

Rev :  A  cross  between  four  mullets  of 
six  points:  rex:  scotorvm*!* 


Obv :  The  King’s  head  crowned,  and 
sceptre,  robertvs  :  dei  :  gra»J* 

Rev :  A  cross  between  four  mullets  of 
five  points  :  scotorvm  :  rex»J* 


INTRODUCTION. 


IF  anyone  were  to  attempt,  five  hundred  years 
hence,  to  write  the  life,  say,  of  Prince  Bismarck, 
and  a  history  of  the  war  between  Germany  and 
France  in  1870-71,  and  should  be  forced  to  rely  ex¬ 
clusively  on  the  newspapers  circulating  at  that  time 
in  the  two  countries,  supplemented  by  a  few  German 
and  French  poems  and  songs  composed  about  the 
middle  of  the  twentieth  century,  and  the  chronicles 
of  intensely  partisan  writers,  reviewing  the  causes 
and  events  of  the  war  at  a  distance  of  sixty  or  seventy 
years,  he  would  be  far  better  equipped  for  his  task 
than  one  who  should  have  undertaken,  comparatively 
few  years  ago,  to  compile  a  history  of  Robert  I.  of 
Scotland  and  the  winning  of  Scottish  independence. 

He  would,  of  course,  have  to  discount  freely  the 
statements  of  journalists  on  either  side,  respecting 
the  causes  which  brought  the  war  about,  and  the 
motives  and  conduct  of  those  engaged  in  it ;  but  he 
would,  at  least,  be  able  to  trace  the  movements  of 
armies,  the  identity  of  commanders,  and  the  conduct 


1 


2 


Introduction . 


of  troops  on  both  sides  in  the  field,  by  means  of  the 
graphic  descriptions  supplied  by  war-correspondents. 

Now  there  were  no  war-correspondents  in  the 
campaigns  of  Robert  the  Bruce.  On  two  occasions, 
indeed,  the  armies  of  England  invading  Scotland 
were  accompanied  by  scribes  specially  commissioned 
to  record  the  course  of  events.  One  of  these,  the 
anonymous  author  of  the  Siege  of  Caerlaverock ,  ful¬ 
filled  his  task  with  admirable  minuteness,  and,  as  the 
victory  lay  with  his  own  side,  with  what  may  be 
assumed  to  be  tolerable  fidelity.  Even  he,  however, 
lies  open  to  the  suspicion  which  attaches  to  all  met¬ 
rical  composers,  for  nobody  expects  a  poet  to  sac¬ 
rifice  the  elegance  of  a  stanza  or  the  neatness  of  a 
rhyme  to  the  inexorable  limits  of  hard  facts. 

On  the  other  occasion  the  result  was  not  so  satis¬ 
factory.  Baston,  a  Carmelite  friar,  rode  with  the 
mighty  host  with  which  Edward  II.  intended  finally 
to  crush  the  Scottish  nation  in  1314.  But,  unluckily 
for  his  patrons,  honest  Baston  was  made  prisoner  at 
Bannockburn,  and  paid  for  his  ransom  by  submitting 
his  long  poem,  of  which  he  had  probably  composed 
the  greater  part  before  the  battle,  to  such  alterations 
as  made  it  a  celebration  of  the  Scottish  triumph. 

There  were,  it  is  true,  many  contemporary  chron¬ 
iclers  busily  at  work  ;  but  not  only  were  they  all, 
with  the  exception  of  the  French  priest  Froissart, 
writing  from  an  English  point  of  view,  but,  except 
Sir  Thomas  de  la  More,  they  were  monks,  compiling 
their  histories  in  the  seclusion  of  some  cloister,  often 
far  from  the  seat  of  war,  and  always  unversed  in 
military  operations.  The  dominant  motive  in  such 


Introduction . 


3 


a  history  as  Pierre  Langtoft’s  was  clearly,  however 
unconsciously  to  the  writer,  to  justify  the  policy  of 
Edward  I.  towards  Scotland.  There  is,  unhappily, 
no  counter-pleading,  written  by  a  contemporary,  to 
set  forth  the  case  of  Wallace  and  Robert  de  Brus. 

Nevertheless,  the  writings  of  Thomas  of  Walsing- 
ham,  Walter  of  Hemingburgh,*  Nicholas  Trivet,  and 
other  English  scribes  are  of  inestimable  worth  so  far 
as  they  go,  especially  as  means  have  lately  been  pro¬ 
vided  of  checking  some  of  their  statements,  and  con¬ 
firming  others,  by  comparison  with  documents  pre¬ 
served  among  the  public  records  of  Great  Britain 
and  other  countries.  These,  thanks  to  the  patient 
labours  of  Mr.  Joseph  Bain,  Sir  Francis  Palgrave, 
Dr.  John  Stuart,  Mr.  George  Burnett,  and  others, 
have  now  been  arranged,  edited,  and  placed  within 
easy  reach  of  every  student  in  the  Calendars  and 
other  publications  sanctioned  by  the  Lords  of  the 
Treasury.  Besides  these,  Sir  T.  D.  Hardy  and  the 
Rev.  J.  Raine  have  edited  in  full  the  papers  and  cor¬ 
respondence  of  the  northern  cathedrals  of  England, 
in  which  the  course  of  the  long  war  is  very  faithfully 
reflected.  But  among  the  English  chronicles  of  the 
fourteenth  century,  there  are  two  which  must  be 
mentioned  as  of  special  service  to  the  study  of  the 
war  between  England  and  Scotland. 

The  first  of  these  is  what  has  come  to  be  known, 
erroneously,  as  there  is  good  reason  to  believe,  as  the 

*  Usually,  but  erroneously,  referred  to  as  Hemingford.  A  canon 
regular  of  the  Austin  Priory  of  Guisborough,  in  Yorkshire,  he  is 
named  de  Hemingburgh  in  a  document  of  that  house,  and  also  in  one 
copy  of  his  own  chronicle. 


4 


Introduction. 


Chronicle  of  Laner cost.  It  contains  a  general  history 
of  the  affairs  of  England  and  Scotland,  with  occa¬ 
sional  references  to  events  on  the  continent  of 
Europe,  from  1201  to  1346.  In  the  only  manuscript 
thereof  known  to  exist,  this  chronicle  is  appended 
without  any  break  to  the  annals  of  Roger  de  Hove- 
den,  and  appears  to  have  been  compiled,  not,  as  was 
once  supposed,  in  the  Priory  of  Lanercost,  but  in  a 
place  much  more  favourable  for  observation  of  the 
course  of  the  Scottish  war,  namely,  in  the  Monastery 
of  Minorite  Friars  at  Carlisle.  It  is  unnecessary  to 
recapitulate  the  evidence  of  this,  which  will  be  found 
fully  set  forth  by  Mr.  Joseph  Stevenson  in  the  intro¬ 
duction  to  his  edition  of  this  chronicle,  printed  for 
the  Maitland  Club  in  1839.  But  h ls  view  enhances 
very  much  the  value  of  the  chronicle  as  an  authority 
on  the  Scottish  war,  of  which  a  brother  of  the 
Franciscan  order,  while  able  to  testify  as  an  eyewit¬ 
ness  to  events  in  that  oft-beleaguered  city,  Carlisle, 
would  also  receive  direct  and  constant  accounts  from 
his  brethren  in  the  monasteries  of  Berwick,  Dumfries, 
and  Dundee.  Hence  the  value  of  this  history  in 
dealing  with  the  War  of  Independence,  though  al¬ 
lowance  must  be  made  sometimes  for  the  bitter  re¬ 
sentment  which  the  English  friar  must  have  had 
good  reason  for  cherishing  against  the  Scots. 

The  other  work  referred  to  as  deserving  special  at¬ 
tention,  though  not  exactly  contemporary,  has  the 
peculiar  merit  of  having  been  written  by  a  layman 
and  a  soldier.  Sir  Thomas  Gray  of  Heton,  besides 
taking  part  in  the  public  affairs  of  the  reign  of  Ed¬ 
ward  III.,  was  the  son  of  that  Sir  Thomas  Gray  who 


Introduction . 


5 


served  with  great  distinction  in  the  Scottish  wars 
under  all  three  Edwards,  and  was  taken  prisoner 
by  the  Earl  of  Moray  in  the  skirmish  on  the  day 
before  the  battle  of  Bannockburn.  In  1355,  Sir 
Thomas  Gray,  the  younger,  was  himself  taken  pris¬ 
oner,  and,  while  confined  in  Edinburgh  Castle,  set 
himself  to  compose  his  Scalacronica  in  Norman 
French.  He  knew  the  ground  well  on  which  the 
various  sieges  and  battles  had  taken  place  ;  he  was 
thoroughly  versed  in  all  chivalrous  and  knightly 
lore,  and  in  the  art  of  war  as  it  stood  before  the  intro¬ 
duction  of  gunpowder.  He  had  become  personally 
acquainted  with  many  of  the  actors  in  the  scenes  he 
described  ;  and,  of  those  which  had  taken  place  be¬ 
fore  he  reached  manhood,  he  had  received  accounts 
from  the  lips  of  his  father,  than  whom  there  could 
be  no  more  capable  authority. 

Turning  now  to  the  Scottish  side  of  the  account, 
the  most  important  work  dealing  with  this  period  is 
the  well-known  poem  entitled  The  Brus ,  by  John 
Barbour,  Archdeacon  of  Aberdeen.  This  writer 
was  born  a  few  years  after  the  battle  of  Bannock¬ 
burn,  and  therefore,  though  not  able  to  describe 
as  a  contemporary  the  early  history  of  his  hero, 
must  have  conversed  with  many  persons  who  took 
part  in  the  events  described.  It  is  consequently  of 
the  utmost  importance  to  ascertain  what  degree  of 
reliance  may  be  placed  on  his  veracity. 

Unhappily,  Barbour’s  poem,  which  is  of  the  deep¬ 
est  interest  to  the  philologer  as  the  very  earliest 
extant  specimen  of  Scottish  vernacular  liteiatuie, 
has  been  almost  irretrievably  discredited  as  a  chroni- 


6 


Introduction. 


cle  by  a  monstrous  liberty  which  the  author  takes  in 
rolling  three  real  personages  into  one  ideal  hero.  In 
this  way  he  has  treated  father,  son,  and  grandson — 
all  of  whom  bore  the  name  of  Robert  de  Brus — and 
gravely  presented  them  as  one  and  the  same  indi¬ 
vidual.  Barbour  was  at  work  on  his  poem,  as  he 
himself  informs  us,  in  1375,  forty-six  years  after  the 
death  of  Robert  I.,  and  it  is  impossible  to  doubt 
that  he  deliberately  and  consciously  perpetrated  the 
fabrication  whereby  he  made  Robert  de  Brus,  the 
“  Competitor/’  the  same  as  his  grandson,  Robert  de 
Brus,  Earl  of  Carrick,  crowned  King  of  Scots  in 
1306,  and  threw  into  the  same  personality  the  in¬ 
termediate  Robert  de  Brus,  Lord  of  Annandale, 
who  was  King  Edward’s  governor  of  Carlisle  dur- 
ing  John  Balliol’s  brief  war.  Such  a  glaring  figment 
placed  in  the  fore-front  of  an  historical  work,  might 
render,  and  in  the  eyes  of  some  people  has  rendered, 
all  that  follows  it  of  no  historical  importance.  This 
great  national  epic  has  been  denounced  as  of  no  more 
value  to  history  than  the  romances  of  Walter  Scott 
or  Alexandre  Dumas.  As  the  late  Mr.  Cosmo  Innes 
observed,  in  editing  The  Brus  for  the  Spalding  Club 
in  1859  : 

“  It  suited  Barbour’s  purpose  to  place  Bruce  altogether  right,  Ed¬ 
ward  outrageously  wrong,  in  the  first  discussion  of  the  disputed  suc¬ 
cession.  It  suited  his  views  of  poetical  justice  that  Bruce,  who  had 
been  so  unjustly  dealt  with,  should  be  the  Bruce  who  took  vengeance 
for  that  injustice  at  Bannockburn  ;  though  the  former  was  the  grand¬ 
father,  the  other  the  grandson.  His  hero  is  not  to  be  degraded  by 
announcing  that  he  had  once  sworn  fealty  to  Edward,  and  once  done 
homage  to  Balliol,  or  ever  joined  any  party  but  that  of  his  country 
and  freedom.” 


Introduction . 


7 


It  must  be  confessed  that,  at  first  sight,  little  of 
value  could  be  looked  for  from  such  a  dubious  source. 
But  closer  examination  reveals  that  the  cardinal 
falsehood  is  all  disposed  of  in  the  first  few  cantos. 
The  first  ten  of  these  may  be  rejected  as  irrelevant 
to  any  honest  purpose.  After  that,  in  the  descrip¬ 
tion  of  the  coronation  of  the  Bruce,  his  flight,  the 
detailed  account  of  his  adventures,  and  his  subse¬ 
quent  campaigns,  the  poet  shows  praiseworthy  re¬ 
spect  for 

“  the  suthfastnes 

That  schawis  the  thing  richt  as  it  was,** 

which  he  declares  in  his  exordium  to  constitute 
the  superiority  of  “  story  ”  over  “  fabill.,>  The  more 
closely  this  part  of  the  narrative  is  examined,  the 
more  fully  it  will  be  found  borne  out  by  such  State 
papers  and  other  documents  as  are  available  for  com¬ 
parison  ;  to  which,  of  course,  Barbour  had  no  access. 
This  was  enough  to  convince  the  critical  intellect  of 
Lord  Hailes,  who,  practised  as  he  was  in  testing  evi¬ 
dence,  did  not  scruple  to  found  largely  on  Barbour’s 
statements. 

It  is  necessary,  however,  to  add  a  further  caution 
in  regard  to  the  witness  borne  by  Barbour  on  highly 
controversial  matters.  Not  only  was  he  actuated  by 
the  laudable  desire  to  win  the  applause  of  his  coun¬ 
trymen  by  showing  the  leaders  of  the  patriotic 
movement  in  the  most  favourable  light,  but  it  was 
also  his  interest  to  pass  lightly  over  anything  that 
might  detract  from  the  lustre  of  the  royal  house  of 
Scotland.  Otherwise  the  royal  bounty  might  have 


8 


Introduction . 


been  checked  at  its  source.  On  the  completion  of 
his  work  in  1377,  Barbour,  as  shown  by  the  Ex¬ 
chequer  Rolls,  received  £  10  by  command  of  the  King. 
Next  year  a  pension  of  2 os.  annually  for  ever,  with 
power  to  assign,  was  awarded  him  for  the  compila¬ 
tion  of  the  book  of  the  “  gestis  ”  of  Robert  de  Brus. 
In  1381  he  had  a  gift  from  the  Crown  of  the  ward  of 
a  minor,  a  curious  parallel  to  a  similar  gift  made  by 
the  King  of  England  to  Chaucer  in  1376.  Again,  in 
1388,  King  Robert  II.  granted  to  the  Archdeacon  a 
pension  of  £10  yearly  for  life,  though  this  probably 
was  made  in  recognition  of  another  poem,  dealing 
with  the  House  of  Stuart,  which  has  been  lost. 
These  substantial  rewards  might  have  been  jeop¬ 
ardised  by  inconvenient  candour  on  the  part  of 
the  volunteer  laureate. 

The  verdict,  therefore,  on  the  value  of  Barbour’s 
poem,  as  a  contribution  to  history,  must  be  that  it 
is  worthless  as  a  record  of  events  which  led  to  the 
War  of  Independence,  but  of  great  merit  as  a  narra¬ 
tive  of  the  events  of  that  war  and  of  the  conduct 
and  acts  of  those  who  took  part  in  it,  and  that  it 
vividly  reflects  the  social  state  of  Scotland  in  the 
fourteenth  century. 

The  most  important  original  writer,  dealing  with 
Scottish  affairs  in  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  cen¬ 
turies,  was  undoubtedly  John  of  Fordun,  who  com¬ 
piled  his  Chronica  Gentis  Scotornm,  commonly  known 
as  the  Scotichronicon,  in  Latin,  between  the  years 
1384  and  1387 — from  fifty-five  to  sixty  years  after 
the  death  of  Robert  I.  With  his  own  hand  he  is 
believed  to  have  completed  his  chronicle  down  to 


Introduction . 


9 


the  death  of  David  I.  in  1153.  Of  subsequent  years, 
down  to  his  own  death  in  1387,  he  had  collected 
very  copious  notes,  which  he  left  in  the  hands  of 
Walter  Bower  or  Bowmaker,  Abbot  of  Inchcolm, 
intending  him  to  bring  the  history  to  a  conclusion. 
Other  continuators  took  the  work  in  hand  during 
the  fifteenth  century ;  but  of  course  neither  their 
work  nor  Bower’s  is  of  equal  value  to  Fordun’s  origi¬ 
nal  notes.  Of  the  compilation  known  as  the  Scoti- 
chronicon,  the  first  five  books  out  of  sixteen  may  be 
safely  regarded  as  the  writing  of  John  of  Fordun, 
and  the  Gesta  Annalia  as  the  notes  which  he  left  with 
Bower.  These  were  carefully  edited  by  the  late  Mr. 
W.  F.  Skene,  and  form  volumes  i.  and  iv.  of  the 

Historians  of  Scotland  series  A 

In  volumes  ii.,  iii.,  and  ix.  of  the  same  series  is 
contained  the  metrical  chronicle  of  Andrew  of  Wyn- 
toun,  a  canon  regular  of  the  Priory  of  St.  Andrews, 
who  wrote  simultaneously  with  Fordun,  but  quite 
independently,  inasmuch  as  neither  was  aware  of  the 
other’s  labours. 

Just  as  Dante  departed  from  the  usual  practice  of 
writers  in  his  day,  and,  instead  of  Latin,  the  only 
recognised  literary  medium,  used  his  native  Tuscan, 
so  Wyntoun,  following  the  excellent  example  of 
Barbour,  ventured  to  compose  his  poem  in  the  ver¬ 
nacular.  Unfortunately,  in  the  same  exasperating 
way  in  which  Barbour  excuses  himself  for  not  telling 
the  manner  in  which  Sir  Andrew  de  Harcla  was  cap¬ 
tured  by  Sir  John  de  Soulis,  so  Wyntoun  refrains 


*  Edinburgh,  1871-80. 


IO 


Introduction. 


from  dwelling  on  the  “gestis”  of  Wallace  and 
Bruce,  because  they  had  been  recounted  by  Bar¬ 
bour  and  others,  and  were  in  everybody’s  mouth  in 
those  days ;  but,  alas !  except  through  Barbour,  they 
have  not  come  down  to  ours. 

Thus  of  Wallace  he  says  : 

“  Off  his  gud  dedis  and  manhad 
Great  gestis,  I  hard  say.  ar  made  ; 

Bot  sa  mony,  I  trow  noucht, 

As  he  in  till  hys  dayis  wroucht. 

Quha  all  his  dedis  off  prys  *  wald  dyte  f 
Hym  worthyd  X  a  gret  buk  to  wryte  ; 

And  all  thai  to  wryte  in  here 
I  want  baith  wyt  and  gud  laysere.”  § 

And  of  Bruce,  Wyntoun  writes : 

“  Quhat  that  efftyr  this  Brws  Robert 
In  all  hys  tyme  dyde  effterwart, 

The  Archedene  of  Abbyrdene  || 

In  Brwys  hys  Buk  has  gert  **  be  sene, 

Mare  wysly  tretyde  in  to  wryt, 

Than  I  can  thynk  with  all  my  wyt  : 

Tharefore  I  will  now  thus  lychtly 
Oure  at  this  tyme  (passe)  the  story.”  ff 

Though  sharing  Wyntoun’s  appreciation  of  Bar¬ 
bour’s  poem  of  The  Brus,  one  would  gladly  have 
excused  the  later  writer  from  the  labour  of  giving 
the  history  of  the  world  from  the  Creation,  had  he 
only  entered  into  fuller  details  regarding  public 

*  Deeds  of  merit.  §  Leisure, 

t  Indite.  ||  Barbour. 

X  He  would  need  to.  **  Caused, 

ff  Wyntoun,  bk.  viii. ,  ch.  xviii.,  i,  2923. 


Introduction. 


1 1 


events  in  the  first  quarter  of  the  fourteenth  cen¬ 
tury.  However,  one  cannot  be  sufficiently  grateful 
to  Wyntoun  for  the  prolixity  and  minuteness  with 
which  he  has  described  persons  and  social  condi¬ 
tions  of  an  age  so  different  from  our  own.  He  has, 
moreover,  this  great  merit  in  common  with  Barbour, 
that,  unlike  some  of  the  English  chroniclers,  he 
does  full  justice  to  the  courage  and  honest  purpose 
of  the  enemy,  and,  though  writing  as  a  patriotic 
Scot,  never  stoops  to  vulgar  and  prejudiced  abuse 
of  the  other  side. 

But,  most  important  of  all,  Barbour,  Fordun,  and 
Wyntoun,  subject  to  allowance  being  made  for 
comparatively  trifling  discrepancies,  for  occasional 
errors  in,  or  transpositions  of,  dates,  and  for  a  few 
mistakes  in  names,  sustain  a  tolerably  searching 
application  of  the  cardinal  test  to  which  all  chroni¬ 
clers  must,  sooner  or  later,  be  submitted,  namely, 
comparison  with  official  records  and  documents,  of 
which  so  many  have  recently  been  brought  to  light. 

It  is  this  last  circumstance,  combined  with  the 
production  of  good  and  carefully  collated  editions 
of  the  early  chronicles,  that  justifies  a  fresh  attempt 
to  record  the  “  gestis  ”  of  Robert  the  Bruce,  to  ana¬ 
lyse  his  character  and  motives,  and  to  weigh  the 
character  of  his  life-work  to  the  Scottish  nation. 
For,  besides  such  allowance  as  must  be  made  for 
the  simplicity  of  the  three  Scottish  historians  above 
referred  to,  who  thought  it  warrant  enough  for 
almost  any  statement  that  it  had  been  written  down 
by  someone  else  before  them,  there  are  the  execrable 
and  wilful  preversion  and  suppression  of  truth  by 


12 


Intro  duct  ion. 


such  later  writers  as  Hector  Boece  and  George 
Buchanan  to  be  got  rid  of.  Truly  did  David  Laing, 
in  observing  that  these  two  only,  of  all  the  Latin 
historians  of  Scotland,  had  been  translated  previously 
to  1870,  remark  in  addition  that  “  they  are  the  very 
two  who  ought  to  have  been  consigned  to  the  deep¬ 
est  obscurity.” 

The  fact  is,  that  between  Wyntoun  in  the  four¬ 
teenth  century,  and  Lord  Hailes  in  the  eighteenth, 
all  the  history  written  in  Scotland  was  worse  than 
worthless.  Lord  Hailes  made  a  splendid  redemp¬ 
tion,  which  only  required  the  materials,  now  at  the 
disposal  of  everybody,  to  be  complete. 

It  now  remains  to  be  explained  what  are  these 
materials.  Previous  to  the  English  Civil  War  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  all  State  papers  were  jealously 
guarded,  and  withheld  from  public  scrutiny.  Even 
historians  were  not  permitted  to  consult  the  archives 
in  order  to  verify  their  statements.  But  during  the 
said  war,  the  leaders  on  either  side  being  anxious 
to  obtain  intelligent  popular  support,  fell  into  the 
habit  of  appealing  to  the  people  by  the  publication 
of  correspondence,  addresses,  and  minutes  of  negoti¬ 
ations.  Between  the  Restoration  and  the  Revolu¬ 
tion  of  1688,  all  public  treaties  entered  into  by 
Great  Britain  were  printed  by  authority.  About 
the  same  time,  various  collections  of  treaties  began 
to  be  published  in  France,  Germany,  and  Austria, 
which  were  eagerly  bought  up  as  fast  as  they  could 
be  produced.  Great  Britain  followed  in  1692,  when 
Thomas  Rymer,  having  been  appointed  Historio¬ 
grapher  Royal  in  succession  to  Shadwell,  was  com- 


Introduction. 


13 


missioned  to  edit  the  leagues,  treaties,  alliances, 
capitulations,  and  confederacies  of  the  kingdom. 
The  outcome  of  this  was  the  celebrated  collection 
known  as  Rymer’s  Foedera  Anglicana ,  of  which  the 
first  volume  was  published  in  1704*  the  twentieth 
and  last  in  1736. 

This  invaluable  fund  of  authentic  information  was 
open  to,  and  greatly  made  use  of  by,  Lord  Hailes  in 
preparing  his  Annals.  No  Scotsman — no  one,  indeed, 
who  prizes  the  dignity  of  history — can  do  too  great 
honour  to  that  writer  for  having  dragged  the  story 
of  his  country  out  of  the  mire  in  which  it  had  been 
suffered  to  sink,  and,  for  the  first  time,  moulded 
it  into  a  trustworthy  and  lucid  record.  Sir  Walter 
Scott  paid  him  no  exaggerated  encomium,  when,  in 
the  introduction  to  The  Lord  of  the  Isles ,  he  said, 
“  Lord  Hailes  was  as  well  entitled  to  be  called  the 
restorer  of  Scottish  history,  as  Bruce  the  restorer  of 
Scottish  monarchy.” 

The  work  begun  by  Rymer  has  not  slumbered. 
Parliament  has  voted  money  freely  to  secute  the 
services  of  the  men  best  fitted  to  edit  those  papers 
which  the  permanent  officials  in  the  various  public 
departments  have  been  indefatigable  in  repairing, 
deciphering,  aud  arranging.  Hence  it  has  come  to 
pass  than  an  immense  amount  of  fresh  material  has 
been  placed  at  the  disposal  of  those  who  care  to 
make  use  of  it.  Much  has  been  brought  to  light 
to  which  Lord  Hailes  had  no  access,  and,  though 
his  work  remains  unshaken,  it  has  been  possible  to 
elucidate  certain  points  on  which  he  was  uncertain 
or  misinformed. 


14 


Introduction . 


In  the  following  narrative  it  has  not  been  thought 
desirable  to  load  the  pages  with  references  in  foot¬ 
notes,  except,  generally,  where  the  authority  of  such 
references  is  cited  to  refute  accepted  statements,  or 
confirm  doubtful  ones  in  the  early  historians.*  But 
gieat  caie  has  been  taken  to  avoid  the  assertion  of 
circumstances  of  which,  even  though  they  may  have 
found  their  way  into  history  books,  there  is  no  means 
of  veiifying.  Some  of  these  are  notoriously  sus¬ 
pect.  Take,  for  example,  the  well-worn  myth  of 
Bruce  and  the  spider.  Probably  it  is  the  incident 
in  Bruce’s  career  most  widely  circulated  and  most 
popularly  believed.  The  critic  who  expresses  doubts 
of  its  veracity  will  be  exposed  to  the  charge  of  irrev¬ 
erence  ;  if  he  professes  disbelief,  to  that  of  rank 
blasphemy.  Yet  where  is  evidence  to  be  found  in 
support  of  it?  Not  in  the  writings  of  Barbour, 
Fordun,  or  Wyntoun,  those  most  nearly  contempor¬ 
ary  with  the  Bruce  and  least  likely  to  suppress  a 
circumstance  so  picturesque,  and  illustrating  so 
aptly  the  perseverance  and  patience  of  the  national 
hero  under  desperate  difficulties.  No  ;  nothing  is 
heard  of  this  adventure  till  long  after  Bruce  and  his 
comiades  have  passed  away,  and  then  it  makes  its 
appearance,  in  company  with  such  trash  as  the  mirac¬ 
ulous  appearance  of  the  arm-bone  of  St.  Fillan  on 
the  eve  of  Bannockburn,  and  worthy  of  just  about 
as  much  consideration. 


*  In  reference  to  Rymer’s  Fcedera  it  will  be  seen  that  I  have  not 
mentioned  the  volume  or  page.  The  reason  is  that  as  there  are  three 
or  four  editions  of  that  great  work,  each  with  different  pagination, 
it  is  easier  to  turn  to  quoted  passages  under  the  year  of  the  event. 


Introduction . 


15 


“  But  then/’  it  may  be  argued  by  persons  unwill¬ 
ing  to  surrender  a  bit  of  favourite  lore,  “  how  comes 
it  that  spiders  are  treated  with  peculiar  respect  in 
Scotland,  and,  especially,  that  no  one  who  claims 
consanguinity  with  Bruce  will  kill,  or  suffer  one  to 
be  killed  in  his  presence?  ” 

The  answer  to  that  is  found  in  the  folk-lore  of 
many  other  countries.  The  Jews  have  a  kindly  re¬ 
gard  for  spiders,  because  it  is  reported  that  when 
David  was  flying  from  Saul  in  the  wilderness  of 
Kish,  and,  closely  pressed,  took  refuge  in  a  cave,  a 
kindly  spider  straightway  spun  a  web  across  the 
mouth,  so  that  when  the  pursuers  came  up  to  it, 
they  judged  that  no  man  had  entered  the  cave 
that  day,  and  they  passed  on  their  way.  A  story, 
precisely  similar,  is  told  of  the  flight  of  Mahomet 
from  Mecca.  Coming  nearer  home,  we  recognise 
the  same  venerable  fable  in  Cornwall,  where  spiders 
are  held  sacred  because  it  is  believed  that  one  of 
them  wove  its  web  over  the  infant  Saviour,  thus 
concealing  him  from  the  search  .  commanded  by 
Herod.  Everywhere  spiders  seemed  to  have  been 
regarded  as  “  uncanny  ”  in  pre-scientific  days  ;  and, 
according  to  universal  human  custom,  an  explana¬ 
tion  was  devised  by  connecting  the  insect  with 
the  most  prominent  national  hero.  With  whose 
career  could  it  more  naturally  be  connected  in  Scot¬ 
land  than  with  that  of  Bruce,  to  whom  Scotland 
owed  her  existence  as  a  nation  ?  There  is,  in  sooth, 
in  his  life,  plenty  of  spirit-stirring  exploit  and  heroic 
confidence  amid  seemingly  hopeless  conditions,  with¬ 
out  borrowing  more  from  the  domain  of  myth.  It 


i6 


Introduction. 


may  be  noticed,  by  the  by,  that  Hume  of  Godscroft, 
composing  his  history  of  the  Douglases  in  the  six¬ 
teenth  century,  appropriated  the  spider  incident  on 
behalf  of  Sir  James  Douglas,  the  companion  of 
Bruce.  He  makes  Douglas  watch  the  insect’s  re¬ 
peated  failures  and  ultimate  success,  which  he  reports 
to  the  King  with  the  appropriate  moral. 


ROBERT  THE  BRUCE. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  MAKING  OF  SCOTLAND. 

A.D.  844-1286. 

ON  July  11,  1274,  was  born  one  who  was  des¬ 
tined  to  have  more  lasting  influence  on  the 
standing  of  Scotland  among  the  nations,  and 
thereby  to  mould  more  powerfully  the  characters 
and  fortunes  of  Scotsmen,  than  any  who  had  gone 
before,  or  who  should,  during  the  three  succeeding 
centuries,  follow  him. 

Robert  de  Brus,  or  Bruce,  as  the  name  has  come 
to  be  written,  was  eighth  in  direct  male  descent  from 
a  Norman  baron  who  came  to  England  with  William 
the  Conqueror.  In  the  roll  of  knights  who  took 
part  in  William’s  expedition,  mention  is  made  of  li 
sires  de  Breaux  e  due  sens  des  homes — the  lords  of 
Breaux  with  two  hundred  men.  It  is  the  only  in¬ 
stance  in  the  roll  quoted  by  Leland  where  the  num- 


17 


i8 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[844  A.D.- 


ber  of  a  knight’s  following  is  given.  These  “  sires  ” 
are  believed  to  have  taken  their  name  from  the  lands 
of  Bruis,  Braose,  or  Breaux  (for  the  name  is  found  in 
various  documents  in  Kngland,  Scotland,  and  France, 
spelled  in  twenty-four  different  ways),  between  Cher¬ 
bourg  and  Valognes,  where  the  understructure  of 
an  ancient  castle  may  still  be  traced. 

The  custom  of  taking  territorial  designations  was 
almost  universal  among  the  Norman  chivalry  in  the 
days  before  such  titles,  or  those  derived  from  heredi¬ 
tary  office,  became  crystallised  into  surnames.  But 
in  the  family  of  de  Brus,  that  branch  of  it,  at  least, 
which  settled  in  Scotland,  the  variation  or  alternation 
of  baptismal  names,  whereby  different  generations 
were  generally  distinguished,  is  almost  wholly  want¬ 
ing.  One  solitary  William  appears  in  a  long  line  of 
Roberts,  so  that  it  requires  no  little  care  to  distin¬ 
guish  between  the  successive  heads  of  this  house. 

One  of  the  “  sires  ”  who  followed  the  Conqueror 
seems  to  have  been  named  William.  He  became 
Lord  of  Brember  in  Sussex,  in  which  county  he  had 
forty-one  lordships,  besides  twelve  in  Dorsetshire, 
and  others  in  Wilts,  Hants,  and  Surrey.  Another 

brother  bore  the  name  of - 

i.  Robert  de  Brus,  who  received,  in  princely  re¬ 
ward  for  his  services,  the  grant  of  ninety-four  manors, 
extending  to  40,000  acres,  in  Yorkshire.  He  died 
about  1094.* 

*  The  author  of  the  Family  Records  of  the  Bruces  and  the  Cumyns 
is  of  opinion  that  Adeline  or  Adam,  son  of  Robert  de  Brus,  was  in 
Britain  some  years  before  the  Ooncpuest,  and  that,  if  he  was  not  the 
first  lord  of  the  Yorkshire  lands,  he  succeeded  to  them,  and  waf 


1286  A. D.]  The  Making  of  Scotland. 


l9 


2.  Robert  de  Brus,  son  of  No.  I,  married  Agnes, 
daughter  of  Fulk  Pagnel  of  Carlton.  He  became  a 
friend  of  David  I.  of  Scotland  at  the  Court  of  Henry 
I.  of  England,  and  subsequently  received  from  David 
a  grant  of  Annandale,  extending  from  the  borders 
of  Dunegal,  Celtic  chief  of  Nithsdale,  to  those  of 
the  Earl  of  Cumberland.* *  Before  the  battle  of  the 
Standard,  1138,  he  renounced  his  Scottish  fief  of 
Annandale,  perhaps  in  favor  of  his  son,  and,  having 
vainly  tried  to  dissuade  King  David  from  fighting, 
joined  the  forces  of  King  Stephen.  He  died  in 
1141. 

3.  Robert  de  Brus,  second  Lord  of  Annandale, 
was  the  second  son  of  No.  2,  whence  he  was  known 
as  le  Meschin,  the  cadet,  or  stripling.  If  he  did  not, 
as  the  story  goes,  receive  Annandale  for  refusing  to 
desert  David’s  cause  at  the  battle  of  the  Standard, 
the  lordship  must  have  been  subsequently  restored 
to  him  in  the  confirmation  granted  by  William 
the  Lion  in  1166,  wherein  the  fee  is  fixed  at  the  ser¬ 
vice  of  a  hundred  knights.  His  chief  house  was 
Lochmaben.  His  elder  brother,  Adam,  succeeded  to 
his  father  s  lands  in  Yorkshire,  and  from  this  point 
the  English  and  Scottish  houses  of  de  Brus  diverge, 
though  le  Meschin  remained  an  English  baron  as  well 
as  a  Scottish  one,  for  his  father  made  over  to  him  the 
manor  of  Hert  in  the  bishopric  of  Durham.  He 

probably  the  first  lord  of  Annandale.  This  Adeline,  if  he  ever  ex¬ 
isted,  must  have  been  father  of  David’s  friend,  Robert  de  Brus,  Lord 
of  Annandale.  But,  as  usual  in  the  work  referred  to,  no  reference  is 
given  to  any  authority  for  this  view. 

*  Charter,  c.  1124. 


20 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[844  A.D.- 


died  about  1189-90.  His  elder  brother  Adeline, 
Lord  of  Skelton  and  owner  of  the  lands  in  York¬ 
shire  and  elsewhere,  became  head  of  the  English 
branch,  which  came  to  an  end  in  the  persons  of  four 
co-heiresses  in  1271. 

4.  Robert  de  Brus,  third  Lord  of  Annandale,  if 
indeed  he  survived  his  father  le  Meschin,  married  the 
Princess  Isabel,  daughter  of  William  the  Lion,  and 
must  have  died  about  1190,  for  his  widow  married 
Robert  de  Ros  in  1191.  He  acquired  with  his  wife 
the  barony  of  Haltwhistle  in  Northumberland. 

5.  William  de  Brus,  fourth  Lord  of  Annandale, 
second  son  of  le  Meschin,  died  in  1215* 

6.  Robert  de  Brus,  fifth  Lord  of  Annandale,  son 
of  William,  the  fourth  lord,  married  Isabel,  second 
daughter  of  David,  Earl  of  Huntingdon,  younger 
brother  of  William  the  Lion,  whence  arose  the  sub¬ 
sequent  claim  of  his  son  to  the  Crown  of  Scotland. 
He  died  in  1245. 

7.  Robert  de  Brus,  sixth  Lord  of  Annandale, 
“  the  Competitor,”  son  of  the  fifth  lord  and  grand¬ 
nephew  of  William  the  Lion,  married  Isabel  de 
Clare,  daughter  of  the  Earl  of  Gloucester.  In  1238, 
Alexander  II.  acknowledged  this  lord  as  his  heir,  an 
act  ratified  by  the  Great  Council,  and  followed  by 
the  performance  of  fealty  to  de  Brus  by  the  barons 
present,  but  the  birth  of  Alexander  III.  in  1241  ex¬ 
tinguished  his  claim  to  the  throne.  He  acquiesced 
in  King  Edward’s  award  in  the  disputed  succession 
in  1292,  and,  being  stricken  in  years,  resigned  all  his 
rights  in  favour  of  his  son,  the  Earl  of  Carrick.  He 
died  in  1295. 


J286  a.d.]  The  Making  of  Scotland.  2 1 

8.  Robert  de  Brus,  seventh  Lord  of  Annandale, 
and,  in  right  of  his  wife,  Earl  of  Carrick,  was  the 
eldest  son  of  the  sixth  lord.  He  married  Marjorie, 
daughter  and  heiress  of  Nigel  or  Niall,  Celtic  Earl 
of  Carrick,  the  grandson  of  Gilbert,  son  of  Fergus, 
Lord  of  Galloway.  This  lady  was  also  the  widow 
of  Adam  of  Kilconquhar.  She  is  said  to  have  met  de 
Brus  returning  from  hunting  ;  to  have  fallen  in  love 
with  him  straightway,  and  carried  him  off  to  her 
castle  of  Turnberry,  where,  after  fifteen  days’  dal¬ 
liance,  she  married  him.  It  has  been  suspected  that 
this  was  a  ruse,  for  Dame  Marjorie  was  a  royal  ward, 
and  de  Brus  committed  a  grave  offence  in  marrying 
her  without  the  King’s  leave  ;  an  offence,  however, 
which  could  not  be  visited  very  seriously  if  the  lady 
could  be  supposed  to  have  taken  the  law  into  her 
own  hands.  De  Brus  took  King  Edward’s  side 
against  Balliol  in  1296,  in  revenge  for  which  Bal- 
liol  seized  Annandale  and  placed  John  Comyn  in 
the  lordship.  De  Brus  was  King  Edward’s  gov¬ 
ernor  of  Carlisle  from  1295  till  1297,  and  died  in 
1304. 

9.  Robert  de  Brus,  eighth  Lord  of  Annandale  and 
Earl  of  Carrick,  was  the  eldest  son  of  the  seventh 
lord  and  Countess  Marjorie.  He  married  first,  Isa¬ 
bel  de  Mar  second,  Elizabeth  de  Burgh,  daughter  of 
the  Earl  of  Ulster,  and  became  King  of  Scotland. 

Three  things  have  to  be  borne  in  mind  in  tra¬ 
cing  the  course  of  the  Scottish  struggle  for  inde¬ 
pendence,  and  in  analysing  the  conflicting  causes 
which  swayed  those  who  took  part  in  it.  First, 
the  comparatively  recent  consolidation  of  Scotland 


22 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[844  A.D.- 


from  four  kingdoms  into  one,  and  the  existence 
within  the  realm  of  four  distinct  races,  perhaps 
nearly  equal  in  numbers ;  namely,  the  Piets,  the 
Scottish  Gael,  the  Teuton  or  Anglian,  and  the 
Scandinavian.  Second,  the  close  relationship  be¬ 
tween  the  royal  houses  of  England  and  Scotland. 
Third,  the  extent  to  which  the  lands  of  the  native 
chiefs  and  septs  had  passed  into  the  hands  of  Nor¬ 
man  barons,  most  of  whom,  besides  doing  homage 
to  the  King  of  Scots  for  estates  held  from  him,  also 
owed  allegiance  to  the  King  of  England  for  lands 
in  his  dominions,  not  less  valuable  and  extensive  than 
their  Scottish  possessions,  and  which  had  generally 
been  much  longer  in  their  families.  This  double 
allegiance  will  be  found  to  account  for  a  great  deal 
of  inconsistency  and  vacillation  shown  by  some  of 
the  most  puissant  barons  of  that  age. 

The  kingdom  of  Scotland,  so  far  as  it  could  be 
said  to  exist  at  the  time  of  the  Norman  conquest  of 
England,  was  of  very  recent  origin  and  of  constantly 
fluctuating  dimensions.  It  is  true  that  in  the  earlier 
half  of  the  ninth  century,  Kenneth  MacAlpin,  King 
of  the  Scots  of  Dalriada,  overcame  the  Piets  by  the 
help  of  the  Danes,  and,  in  844,  became  the  first 
monarch  over  all  Alban,  or,  as  it  subsequently  came 
to  be  called,  Scotia.  But  this  kingdom  of  Scone 
included  no  more  than  central  Scotland,  Perthshire, 
Argyll,  Angus  and  Mearns,  and  Fife.  The  ancient 
territory  of  the  northern  Piets,  extending  over  a 
great  part  of  what  we  now  call  the  Highlands,  was 
partly  under  independent  Celtic  chiefs  and  partly 
held  by  Norsemen.  Galloway  and  half  Ayrshire 


1286  a.d.1  The  Making  of  Scotland. 


23 


were  alternately  under  Pictish,  Norse,  and  Saxon 
(Northumbrian)  rule  ;  while  Lothian,  though  nomi¬ 
nally  part  of  the  realm  of  Northumbria,  was  really 
the  prey  of  rival  Saxon  chiefs.  The  Norse  jarls  of 
Orkney  maintained  independent  sway  in  Caithness 
and  the  Sudreys  or  Western  Isles,  and  in  parts  of 
Galloway,  till  after  the  death  of  Earl  Sigurd  at  the 
battle  of  Clontarf  near  Dublin,  in  1014.  Even 
then  the  Scottish  realm  could  not  be  reckoned 
as  extending  south  of  the  Forth  or  north  of  the 
Spey. 

But  in  1054  an  important  advance  was  made 
towards  consolidation.  Malcolm  Canmore,  son  of 
Duncan  slain  by  Macbeth,  was  then  rightful  King  of 
Scotia.  His  uncle,  Siward,  Danish  Earl  of  Northum¬ 
bria,  espoused  his  cause  against  the  usurper  Macbeth, 
and  invaded  Scotia.  Failing  in  his  intention  to  de¬ 
throne  Macbeth,  who  was  supported  by  Thorfinn, 
Earl  of  Orkney,  he  succeeded  in  wresting  from  him 
Cumbria  and  the  Lothians,  and  established  Malcolm 
as  King  of  Cumbria.  Three  years  later,  Malcolm 
attacked  Macbeth,  drove  him  across  the  Mounth,  and 
slew  him  at  Lumphannan,  August  15,  1057. 

This  was  probably  the  year  of  powerful  Earl 
Thorfinn’s  death  and  the  consequent  severance  of 
the  nine  earldoms  held  in  subjection  by  him.  It 
was  then,  only  three  years  before  the  Norman  con¬ 
quest  of  England,  that  Scotland  first  presented  the 
semblance  of  an  united  and  independent  kingdom, 
though  even  at  that  time  the  Celtic,  Saxon,  and 
Norse  elements  in  the  population  were  too  distinct, 
and  too  sharply  defined  in  locality,  to  offer  much 


24 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[844  A.D.- 


prospect  of  permanent  union  into  a  homogeneous 
nationality. 

King  Malcolm  diplomatically  endeavoured  to  con¬ 
ciliate  his  Norse  subjects  by  marrying  Ingibiorg, 
widow  of  his  ancient  enemy  Thorfinn,  and  by  her  he 
had  a  son,  Duncan.  She  must  have  died  before 
1067,  for  in  that  year  Child  Eadgar,  son  of  Eadward 
Aetheling,  flying  with  his  mother  and  sisters  before 
the  Normans,  sought  refuge  in  the  Scottish  Court. 
Malcolm,  having  by  his  first  marriage  put  the  Norse¬ 
men  in  good  humour,  now  flattered  the  Anglo-Saxons 
of  his  realm  by  taking  as  his  second  consort  the  Prin¬ 
cess  Margaret,  sister  of  Eadgar  Aetheling.  This  in¬ 
volved  him  in  prolonged  hostilities  with  King 
William,  for  Malcolm  championed  the  cause  of  his 
brother-in-law,  whom  the  northern  English  regarded 
as  their  rightful  king.  From  this  point  may  be 
traced  the  original  cause  of  subsequent  long  centuries 
of  war  between  England  and  Scotland  ;  for  King 
William,  having  invaded  Scotland,  forced  Malcolm 
to  become  his  man,  taking  his  son  Duncan  as  hos¬ 
tage  and  granting  Malcolm  lands  in  England  as 
further  security  for  good  faith. 

In  1091  a  reconciliation  was  effected  between 
William  Rufus,  Malcolm,  and  Eadgar  Aetheling; 
Malcolm  doing  fresh  homage  for  his  English  posses¬ 
sions,  which,  according  to  some  writers,  consisted 
only  of  lands  in  the  south  ;  according  to  others,  also 
included  Lothian.  But  the  good  understanding  did 
not  last  long.  Malcolm  having  reopened  hostilities 
was  defeated  and  slain  near  Alnwick  in  1093,  and  with 


1286  A.D.] 


The  Making  of  Scotland. 


25 


him  fell  his  son  and  heir  Eadward.  The  ancient 
British  kingdom  of  Cumbria  was  severed  in  twain , 
the  northern  half,  from  Solway  to  Clyde  remaining 
part  of  Scotland,  the  southern  half  becoming  perma¬ 
nently  annexed  to  the  realm  of  England.  Thus  the 
frontier  between  England  and  Scotland  was  drawn 
along  very  nearly  the  same  line  it  occupies  at  this 
day,  though,  as  will  be  shown  hereafter,  it  has  often 
been  violently  disturbed.  Caithness  and  Orkney 
were  still  Norse  territory,  and  over  the  Western  Isles 
and  Galloway  the  Scottish  monarch  exercised  no 
more  than  a  nominal,  or  at  least  intermittent,  rule. 

But  Malcolm’s  newly  knit  kingdom  was  to  lose 
after  his  death  even  the  semblance  of  unity  which 
he  had  conferred  on  it.  Donald  Ban,  Malcolm  s 
brother,  reigned  for  six  months,  to  be  dispossessed 
by  Duncan,  Malcolm’s  eldest  son  by  Queen  Ingi- 
biorg,  who  also  reigned  six  months.  Duncan  was 
slain  in  the  Mearns  by  the  forces  of  his  half-brother 
Eadmund,  and  his  uncle,  Donald  Ban,  who  then 
shared  the  throne  between  them,  and  reigned  for 
three  years,  1094-97.  They  were  in  turn  deposed 
by  Eadgar  Aetheling  in  favour  of  another  of  Mal¬ 
colm  Canmore’s  sons,  Eadgar,  who  reigned  over  the 
kingdom  of  Scotland,  under  the  limitations  above 
described,  for  nine  years,  1097-1107.  Donald  and 
Eadward  were  both  imprisoned  for  life,  the  former, 
for  his  better  security,  being  deprived  of  sight. 
Dying  in  1107,  Eadgar  bequeathed  to  his  brother 
Alexander  the  ancient  and  independent  kingdom  of 
Alban  or  Scotia  proper,  while  to  his  younger  brother 
David  he  left  Lothian  and  all  that  remained  Scot- 


26 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


1844  A.D.- 


tish  of  Cumbria,  namely,  the  counties  of  Dumfries, 
Lanark,  north  Ayrshire,  Renfrew,  and  Dunbarton. 
Thus  by  his  own  act  the  King  of  Scots  deliberately 
divided  the  kingdom  which  it  had  cost  so  much  hard 
fighting  to  put  together.  This  partition  of  the  realm 
endured  till  the  death  of  Alexander  the  Fierce*  in 
1124. 

David  was  now  the  only  surviving  son  of  Malcolm 
Canmore.  His  sister  Matilda  had  become  Queen  of 
England  in  1100  by  her  marriage  with  Henry  I., 
and  David  had  spent  much  of  his  youth  at  her  Court, 
a  circumstance  that  was  to  have  much  influence  on 
the  current  of  events  in  the  northern  kingdom.  For 
it  was  there  that  young  David  became  acquainted 
with  Norman  civilisation,  and  easily  acquired  the 
idea  of  feudal  rule,  which  presented  itself  to  him 
with  all  the  glamour  of  chivalry.  His  brother-in- 
law,  King  Henry,  bestowed  on  him  in  marriage  Ma¬ 
tilda,  daughter  of  Waltheof,  Earl  of  Northumberland, 
and  widow  of  Simon,  Earl  of  Northampton.  The 
latter  earldom,  with  the  honour  of  Huntingdon, 
David  enjoyed  during  his  wife’s  life.  Now  an  earl¬ 
dom  in  Norman  days  was  not  the  barren  honour  it 
has  become  in  modern  times.  It  carried  with  it 
feudal  power  and  almost  absolute  jurisdiction  over 
the  manors  attached  to  it,  besides  such  revenues  as 
they  might  produce.  Consequently,  David  was  as 
much  a  Norman  baron  in  fact,  as  he  had  already 
become  in  sympathy.  He  did  homage  to  King 

*  “  Hys  legys  all 

Oysid  hym  Alysandyr  the  Fers  to  call.” 

Wyntoun,  bk.  vii.,  c.  5. 


1286  A.D.] 


The  Making  of  Scotland. 


27 


Henry  for  his  English  earldom  if  not  for  his  do¬ 
minion  of  Lothian.  When  he  left  the  English 
Court  in  1124  to  set  up  his  own  Court  as  King  of 
Lothian  and  Strathclyde,  he  brought  with  him  many 
young  Norman  knights,  his  friends,  among  whom 
came,  as  has  been  shown,  Robert  de  Brus,  on  whom 
the  lordship  of  Annandalehad  been  bestowed.  This 
well-known  name  is  appended  to  the  foundation 
charter  granted  by  David  in  1113  to  the  monastery 
of  Selkirk.  It  is  one  of  twenty-eight  signatures,  of 
which  no  fewer  than  eleven  are  those  of  Norman 
witnesses,  amid  nine  Saxon,  one  Celtic,  and  those  of 
the  Bishop  of  Glasgow,  three  chaplains,  and  Queen 
Matilda,  besides  King  David’s  son  Henry,  and  his 
nephew  William. 

When  Alexander  the  Fierce  died  in  1124,  David’s 
government  of  southern  Scotland  had  been  entirely 
remodelled  on  the  feudal  pattern  ;  the  greater  part 
of  the  soil  was  held  in  fief  by  Norman  barons,  and  as 
much  as  possible  had  been  done  to  make  the  people 
forget  that  there  was  any  real  difference  between 
them  and  the  subjects  of  King  Henry. 

As  soon  as  David  succeeded  his  brother  Alexander 
on  the  throne  of  Scotland  proper,  he  set  on  foot 
similar  reforms  there  also.  The  ancient  constitution 
of  the  Seven  Earls  was  superseded,  as  the  tenour  of 
David’s  charters  proves,  to  make  place  for  a  feudal 
scheme  of  “  bishops,  abbots,  earls,  sheriffs,  barons, 
governors,  and  officers,  and  all  the  good  men  of  the 
whole  land,  Norman,  English,  and  Scots.”  He  still 
did  fealty  to  Henry  for  his  territory  in  Lothian,  but 
north  of  the  Firths  David  was  absolute  monarch  of 


28 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[844  A.D.- 


all  except  Caithness  and  the  Isles.  Many,  if  not 
most  of  his  barons,  owed  homage  to  the  English 
king  for  their  lands  south  of  the  Border. 

If  this  want  of  solidarity  in  the  monarchy  and  gov¬ 
ernment  delayed,  as  it  must  have  done,  the  birth  of 
a  national  spirit  and  the  expansion  of  the  narrow 
bonds  of  sept  into  intelligent  patriotism,  much  more 
must  the  piebald  ethnology  of  David's  dominion 
have  stood  in  the  way.  Considerable  fusion,  no 
doubt,  had  already  taken  place,  in  certain  districts, 
between  Celtic,  Saxon,  and  Norse  people.  Members 
of  the  same  family  sometimes  bore,  one  a  Gaelic, 
another  a  Saxon  name.*  But  the  four  separate 
kingdoms  of  ancient  Alban  of  the  eighth  century 
were  still  peopled  by  widely  different  races.  The 
Scots  of  Argyll  and  the  Isles  had  become  pretty 
well  fused  with  the  Piets  of  the  Highlands  ;  but  they 
had  looked  upon  the  Welshmen  of  Strathclyde,  not 
as  brother  Celts,  but  as  hereditary  foes,  ever  since 
the  Roman  occupation.  The  Saxon  population  of 
Lothian,  Tweeddale  and  Strathannan  were  equally 
severed  from  the  Highlands  by  the  barrier  of  differ¬ 
ent  speech.  Even  at  the  present  day  may  be  traced 
some  of  the  ancient  contempt  of  the  Gael  for  the 
Saisneach  or  Saxon,  a  feeling  which,  in  the  reign  of 
David  I.,  had  been  tempered  by  none  of  the  enlight¬ 
ening  influence  of  education.  As  for  the  people  of 
Caithness  and  the  Isles,  it  must  have  seemed  an  idle 

*  It  is  recorded  in  1166  how  Richard  de  Morville,  Constable  of 
Scotland,  sold  Edmund,  the  son  of  Bonda,  and  Gillemichel,  his 
brother,  to  Henry  St.  Clair.  Here  Edmund  and  Bonda  are  Saxon 
names,  but  Gillemichel  is  Gaelic. 


1286  A.D.] 


29 


The  Making  of  Scotland. 

dream  to  unite  them  with  the  races  with  which  they 
had  for  centuries  been  at  cruel  enmity  ;  and  the 
men  of  Galloway,  though  originally  of  Celtic  race, 
had  been  so  long  under  Norse  influence,  and  were  so 
largely  infused  with  Norse  blood,  that  they  had 
become  known  among  other  Celts  as  Gall  Gaidheal , 
foreign  Gaels  ;  Gaels,  that  is,  but  foreigners,  much 
as  Englishmen  now  look  on  Americans.  *  The 
formidable  insurrection  of  1130,  under  Malcolm  and 
Angus,  the  sons  of  Heth  and  grandsons  of  Lulach, 
the  Mormaer  of  Moray,  was  a  revolt  of  the  Gael 
against  the  Saisneach,  for  Saxon  and  Norman  were 
merged  in  the  common  term  applied  to  the  hated 
Southerner.  Of  like  nature  was  the  rising  under  the 
impostor  Wimund  between  1141  and  1150*  when 
many  Celtic  chiefs  joined  in  an  attempt  to  throw  off 
the  Norman  yoke  which  the  policy  of  David  had 
laid  upon  the  land. 

However,  when  David  invaded  England  in  1138 
to  support  his  niece,  Matilda,  in  her  conflict  with 
Stephen,  his  army,  as  Ailred  of  Rievauld  affirms,  was 
composed,  not  only  of  men  under  his  own  rule,  but 
of  those  under  Norse  dominion  also. 

This  expedition  placed  several  of  David  s  Norman 
barons  in  a  dilemma  ;  for,  if  they  refused  to  follow 
the  King  of  Scots,  their  Scottish  lands  and  dignities 
would  be  in  jeopardy  ;  whereas  if  they  marched  with 
David,  and  yet  failed  to  overthrow  Stephen,  they 
would  be  sure  to  forfeit  their  English  possessions. 

Upon  none  of  them  did  this  weigh  more  heavily 


*  The  modern  name  Galloway  is  an  altered  form  of  Gall-gaidheal 
through  the  Welsh  Gall-wyddel. 


3o 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[844  A.D.- 


than  on  Robert  de  Brus,  the  friend  of  David’s  youth, 
who,  it  is  said,  made  himself  the  mouthpiece  of  his 
peers,  and  sought  audience  with  the  King  in  his 
camp  on  the  Tees,  in  order  to  remonstrate  with  him. 
Ailred  gives  a  speech  at  length  which  he  was  sup¬ 
posed  to  have  delivered  to  David,  of  which  one 
sentence  is  worth  quoting,  as  illustrating  the  pre¬ 
carious  nature  of  Scottish  nationality  in  those  early 
days. 

“  Against  whom,”  says  Bruce,  “  dost  thou  this  day 
take  up  arms  and  lead  this  countless  host  ?  Is  it  not 
against  the  English  and  Normans?  O  King,  are 
they  not  those  from  whom  thou  hast  always  ob¬ 
tained  profitable  counsel  and  prompt  assistance? 
When,  I  ask  thee,  hast  thou  ever  found  such  fidelity 
in  the  Scots,  that  thou  canst  confidently  dispense 
with  the  advice  of  the  English  and  the  assistance  of 
the  Normans,  as  if  the  Scots  sufficed  thee  even 
against  the  Scots?” 

It  is  said  that  the  King  s  love  for  de  Brus  inclined 
him  to  yield  to  his  persuasion,  but  that  William, 
David’s  nephew,  overruled  him,  and  he  remained 
inflexible,  whereupon  de  Brus  and  Bernard  de  Balliol 
renounced  their  allegiance  to  the  King  of  Scots.  De 
Brus  resigned  his  lordship  of  Annandale  in  favour 
of  his  second  son,  a  boy  of  fourteen,  and  went  over 
to  Stephen  s  camp,  leaving  the  lad  in  command  of 
the  men  of  Annandale.  Tradition,  a  dubious  guide, 
goes  on  to  say  that  in  the  battle  of  the  Standard 
which  followed,  de  Brus  took  his  own  son  prisoner, 
and  that  when  he  brought  the  stripling  before  the 
victorious  Stephen  and  asked  how  he  wished  him 


1286  A.D.] 


The  Making  of  Scotland. 


33 


disposed  of  (for  he  could  not  hold  his  own  son  to 
ransom),  the  English  King,  laughing,  said,  “  Take 
him  to  his  nurse  !  ” 

Notwithstanding  his  defeat,  David  not  only  re¬ 
tained  the  earldom  of  Huntingdon,  but  stipulated 
that  his  son  Henry  should  hold  the  earldom  of 
Northumberland  under  Stephen.  Thus  the  King  of 
Scots  and  his  sons  were  both  vassals  of  the  Crown  of 
England.  On  the  other  hand,  Stephen,  then  at  civil 
war  with  Queen  Matilda,  was  not  strong  enough  to 
deprive  David  of  Cumberland  and  Carlisle,  which 
had  again  become  part  of  the  Scottish  kingdom. 

King  David  I.  died  in  1153.  His  successor,  Mal¬ 
colm  IV.,  surrendered  both  Northumberland  and 
Cumberland  to  Henry  II.,  but  indemnified  himself 
by  the  subjugation  of  Moray,  where  the  Celtic  popu¬ 
lation  had  become  much  intermixed  with  a  numer¬ 
ous  settlement  of  Flemings.  The  old  Picto-Norse 
province  of  Galloway,  too,  comprising  the  modern 
counties  of  Wigtown  and  Kirkcudbright,  with  south 
Ayrshire,  was  now  brought  into  final  subjection. 
For,  when  King  Malcolm  went  to  fight  the  battles 
of  Henry  II.  in  France,  which,  as  his  liegeman  for 
Lothian  and  his  English  estates,  he  was  bound  to  do, 
he  was  summoned  back  in  haste,  and  returned  to 
find  his  kingdom  in  confusion.  The  Galwegians 
were  in  open  revolt  under  their  hereditary  lord, 
Fergus,  endeavouring  to  place  William,  great-grand¬ 
son  of  their  lady  Ingibiorg  on  the  throne  of  Scot¬ 
land.  Twice  Malcolm’s  expeditions  were  repelled, 
but  the  third  time  success  crowned  his  arms,  and 
Galloway  was  finally  brought  into  the  realm,  though 


32 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[844  A.D„- 


the  disaffection  of  its  people  continued,  for  more 
than  a  century,  to  be  a  source  of  insecurity  to  the 
unity  of  Scotland. 

Scottish  statesmen  still  held  that  Northumberland 
and  Cumberland  were  rightfully  part  of  their  king¬ 
dom.  It  was  in  faith  of  a  promise  that  these  earl¬ 
doms  should  be  restored  to  him  that  William  the 
Lion,  King  of  Scots,  fought  in  the  army  of  Henry 
II.  against  France,  as  his  vassal  for  the  earldom  of 
Huntingdon  ;  and  it  was  because  of  the  failure  of 
Henry  to  fulfil  this  promise  that  King  William  took 
the  first  step  in  the  long  alliance  between  Scotland 
and  France,  by  making  overtures  to  Louis  VII. 
William  the  Lion  was  taken  prisoner  at  Alnwick  in 
1174,  and,  in  order  to  obtain  his  release,  consented 
to  a  condition  which  gave  fresh  ground  for  the  con¬ 
troversy  about  the  suzerainty  of  the  Kings  of  Eng¬ 
land  over  Scotland.  He  bound  himself  to  do 
homage  for  his  own  kingdom  to  the  English 
monarch.  Fifteen  years  later,  Richard  Coeur  de 
Lion,  being  in  straits  for  ready  money,  remitted  this 
humiliating  obligation  for  a  payment  of  ten  thousand 
marks. 

In  view  of  the  subsequent  course  of  events,  it  is 
of  moment  to  remember  the  terms  of  King  Richard’s 
resignation  : 

“  We  have  rendered  up  to  William,  by  the  grace  of  God  King  of 
Scots,  his  castles  of  Roxburgh  and  Berwick,  to  be  possessed  by  him 
and  his  heirs  for  ever  as  their  own  proper  inheritance. 

“  Moreover,  we  have  granted  to  him  an  acquittance  of  all  obliga¬ 
tions  which  our  good  father,  Henry  King  of  England,  extorted 
(extorsit)  from  him  by  new  instruments  in  consequence  of  his  cap¬ 
tivity  ;  under  this  condition  only,  that  he  shall  completely  and  fully 


1286  A.D.]  The  Making  of  Scotland . 


33 


perform  to  us  whatever  his  brother  Malcolm,  King  of  Scotland,  of 
right  performed,  or  ought  of  right  to  have  performed,  to  our  prede¬ 
cessors.”  * 

King  Richard,  by  the  same  instrument,  re-estab¬ 
lished  the  Marches  of  the  two  kingdoms  as  they  had 
been  before  William’s  captivity.  He  also  delivered 
up  such  of  the  evidences  of  the  homage  done  to 
King  Henry  II.  by  the  Scottish  clergy  and  barons 
as  were  in  his  possession,  and  declared  that  all  such 
evidences,  whether  delivered  up  or  not,  should  be 
held  as  cancelled. f  Nothing  could  be  more  com¬ 
plete,  or  intended  to  be  more  complete,  than  the 
restoration  of  her  independence  to  Scotland  as  she 
then  was. 

It  was  not,  however,  until  the  reign  of  Alexander 
III.  that  the  Scottish  kingdom  as  we  know  it,  with 
the  exception  of  Orkney  and  Shetland  and  the  addi¬ 
tion  of  the  Isle  of  Man,  was  completed  by  the  over¬ 
throw,  in  1263,  of  Haco,  King  of  Norway,  at  the 
battle  of  Largs.  The  Western  Isles  were  then  first 
made  subject  to  the  Scottish  Crown. 

Thus  it  will  be  observed  that,  towards  the  close  of 
the  thirteenth  century,  the  kingdom  of  Scotland 
was  a  territory  very  different  from  any  that  had 
borne  that  name  in  the  past.  Newborn  Scotland  had 
at  last  become  something  more  than  what  Metter- 
nich  once  called  Italy — “  a  geographical  expression.” 

But  it  was  not  only  by  extending  the  bounds  of 
his  dominion  that  this  wise  and  strong  monarch  suc¬ 
ceeded  in  welding  into  one  nation  the  different  and 


*  Feeder  a. 
vf  Hailes,  i.,  155. 


34 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[844  A.D.- 


hostile  races  inhabiting  it.  It  was  by  indefatigable 
attention  to  the  affairs  of  government — by  cultivat¬ 
ing  friendly  relations  with  stronger  powers,  and 
especially  with  England — by  incessant  personal  visi¬ 
tation  of  all  parts  of  his  realm — that  he  led  his 
people  to  look  to  the  throne  as  the  fountain  of 
power  and  protection.  The  degree  to  which  the 
ruling  class  had  become  alien — Norman — was  shown 
at  the  coronation  of  Alexander  III.  in  1249,  when 
the  coronation  oath  was  first  read  in  Latin,  and  then 
expounded  in  Norman-French.*  But  by  his  atten¬ 
tion  to  the  development  of  commerce  and  native 
industry,  he  taught  the  industrial  and  commercial 
classes  that  the  government  was  something  more 
than  a  contrivance  for  collecting  taxes  or  for  exact¬ 
ing  onerous  military  service.  Thus  he  prepared  the 
only  soil  in  which  the  plant  of  patriotism  will  ever 
take  root  and  flourish.  Men  will  never  be  got  to 
make  sacrifices  for  that  which  it  is  not  their  private 
interest  to  preserve  and  defend.  Wallace  and  Bruce 
would  have  toiled  in  vain,  but  for  the  sentiment  of 
common  nationality  which  King  Alexander  called 
into  being. 

But  the  Scottish  King’s  ardour  for  Scottish  na¬ 
tionality  betrayed  him  into  no  jealousy  of,  or  rivalry 
with  his  powerful  neighbour.  On  the  contrary, 
throughout  his  long  reign  he  sought  and  maintained 
friendly  relations,  first  with  Henry  III.  and  then 
with  Edward  I.  On  December  26,  1251,  King 
Alexander  married  Princess  Margaret,  daughter  of 


*  Hailes,  i.,  195. 


1286  A. D.]  The  Making  of  Scotland. 


35 


Henry  III.,  thus  adding  one  more  to  the  many 
bonds  of  consanguinity  which  united  the  royal 
houses  of  England  and  Scotland. 

Alexander  was  only  ten  years  of  age  at  the  time 
of  this  marriage,  and  King  Henry  thought  it  a  good 
opportunity  to  renew  the  defunct  claim  to  the 
homage  of  Scotland,  “  according  to  the  usage  re¬ 
corded  in  many  chronicles.”  But  King  Alexander, 
acting  under  advice  of  his  ministers,  wisely  made 
answer  that  “  he  had  been  invited  to  York  to  marry 
the  Princess  of  England,  not  to  treat  of  affairs  of 
State,  and  that  he  could  not  take  such  an  important 
step  without  the  knowledge  and  approbation  of  his 
Parliament.” 

The  claim  of  the  English  Kings  to  the  homage  of 
Scotland  was  renewed  from  time  to  time,  com¬ 
pletely  ignoring  the  renunciation  by  Richard  Cceur 
de  Lion.  Henry  III.  died  in  1272.  In  1278  King 
Alexander  did  homage  to  Edward  I.  in  general 
terms,  and  by  proxy.  Robert  de  Brus,  afterwards 
to  become  famous  as  “  the  Competitor,”  performed 
the  ceremony  in  place  of  the  King  of  Scots,  using 
the  formula — “  for  the  services  due  on  account  of 
the  lands  and  tenements  which  I  hold  of  the  King 
of  England.”  King  Edward  accepted  it,  though 
certain  discrepancies  in  the  record,  which  contains  a 
clause  “  saving  the  claim  of  homage  for  the  kingdom 
of  Scotland  whenever  that  question  might  be  raised,” 
have  caused  grave  doubts  as  to  its  authenticity.* 

King  Alexander’s  first  Queen,  Margaret  of  Eng- 


*  Robertson’s  Scotland  under  her  Early  Kings ,  ii.,  p.  425. 


36 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[844  A.D.- 


land,  died  in  1275.  Ten  years  later,  he  married 
Joleta,  daughter  of  the  Count  de  Dreux. 

On  March  16,  1286,  the  King  held  a  dinner-party 
in  Edinburgh,  though  it  was  the  season  of  Lent. 
After  dinner  he  set  out,  accompanied  by  three 
knights,  in  a  terrible  tempest,  to  visit  his  young 
Queen,  then  residing  at  Kinghorn  in  Fife.  At 
Queensferry  the  boatman  tried  to  dissuade  the 
King  from  attempting  the  passage  on  such  an  awful 
night ;  but  he  good-humouredly  asked  the  man  if  he 
was  afraid  to  face  death  in  such  good  company. 
“  Not  I,  sire,”  quoth  the  boatman,  “  it  would  well 
become  me  to  perish  with  your  father’s  son  !  ”  The 
crossing  was  effected  in  safety,  and  the  party  landed 
in  the  dark  at  Inverkeithing.  Here  the  master  of 
the  King’s  saltworks  pressed  him  not  to  persevere 
through  the  storm,  but  to  deign  to  accept  a  bed  in 
his  house  and  proceed  in  daylight.  The  King,  laugh¬ 
ing,  refused  his  hospitality,  but  asked  for  a  couple 
of  guides  on  foot ;  for  the  road  probably  was  a  mere 
bridle-path  through  woods  and  moors.  They  had 
not  gone  above  two  miles  before  they  lost  the  track ; 
and  in  trying  to  regain  it,  the  King  fell  from  his 
horse  and  was  killed.*  He  died  in  the  forty- 
fifth  year  of  his  life  and  the  thirty-seventh  of  his 
reign. 

There  were  not  wanting  superstitious  critics  who 
viewed  his  death  as  a  judgment  for  feasting  and 
visiting  his  wife  in  Lent;  but  Fordun,  with  loftier 
view,  pronounced  this  noble  elegy  on  the  dead  mon- 


*  Lanercost,  115. 


1286  a.d.]  The  Making  of  Scotland. 


37 


arch :  “  Let  no  man  question  the  salvation  of  this 
King.  He  who  has  lived  well,  cannot  die  ill.” 

No  greater  calamity  could  have  befallen  the  young 
kingdom  of  Scotland  than  the  unforeseen  end  of  this 
beneficent  ruler.  Henceforward  the  resources  of  the 
country  were  to  be  sapped  by  perpetual  warfare, 
civil  and  foreign  ;  the  wealth  accumulated  under  the 
prosperous  reigns  of  Alexander  and  his  predeces¬ 
sors  was  to  be  dissipated,  and  all  productive  indus¬ 
try  brought  to  a  standstill,  until  the  very  name  of 
Scot  should  become  a  synonym  for  pauper  in  the 
languages  of  Europe. 


Sir  John  de  Balliol. 


Sir  Robert  de  Brus. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE  DISPUTED  SUCCESSION. 

A.D.  I286-I29I. 

THE  gravity  of  the  crisis  in  Scottish  affairs  lay 
in  the  fact  that  Alexander  III.  had  died 
childless.  Two  sons  had  predeceased  him, 
and  one  daughter,  Princess  Margaret,  who  had  mar¬ 
ried  Eric,  King  of  Norway.  She  left  a  daughter, 
also  called  Margaret,  upon  whom,  on  February  5, 
1284,  the  succession  to  the  throne  of  Scotland  had 
been  settled  by  the  Parliament  of  Scone,  “  failing 
any  children  whom  Alexander  might  have,  and  fail¬ 
ing  the  issue  of  the  Prince  of  Scotland.”* * 

Princess  Margaret,  or  the  Maid  of  Norway,  as  she 
is  known  in  the  mournful  annals  of  these  years,  be¬ 
ing  an  infant  at  her  father’s  Court,  a  Regency  was 
appointed  immediately  after  the  King’s  death,  con¬ 
sisting  of  six  Guardians  of  the  realm.  These  were 

j 

*  King  Alexander’s  eldest  son  by  Queen  Margaret,  Prince  Alexan¬ 
der,  married  Margaret,  daughter  of  Guy,  Earl  of  Flanders,  in  1282, 
and  died  in  January,  1284. 


38 


1286-91  A. D.]  The  Disputed  Succession . 


39 


William  Fraser,  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews,  Duncan, 
Earl  of  Fife,  and  Alexander,  Earl  of  Buchan,  having 
authority  over  the  dominions  north  of  the  Firths; 
and  Robert  Wishart,  Bishop  of  Glasgow,  John 
Comyn,  Lord  of  Badenoch,  and  James  the  Steward, 
for  the  country  south  of  the  Firths.  Lord  Hailes 
affirms  that  this  was  done  by  general  consent,  and 
is  severe  in  comment  upon  the  historian  Buchanan 
for  having  said  “affectedly  and  erroneously”  that 
the  business  of  the  assembly  at  Scone  was  the  ques¬ 
tion  of  creating  a  new  King,  whereas  that  had  been 
already  settled  by  the  acknowledgment  in  1284  of 
the  Maid  of  Norway  as  presumptive  heir  to  the 
throne.  But  in  truth  there  is  now  good  reason  to 
doubt  the  unanimity  of  the  consent  to  that  settle¬ 
ment.  King  Alexander  was  only  forty-four  when 
it  was  made.  The  probability  of  his  dying  shortly, 
or  without  more  issue,  was  remote.  Assent  was 
given  to  the  settlement,  no  doubt,  but  nobody  could 
foresee  how  soon  it  was  to  take  effect,  and  some 
who  might  have  objected  probably  did  not  think  it 
worth  while,  seeing  that  the  King  was  just  about  to 
take  a  second  wife.  Be  that  as  it  may,  the  fact  has 
now  come  to  light  that,  twelve  days  after  King 
Alexander’s  death,  the  Bishops  of  St.  Andrews  and 
Glasgow,  and  the  magnates  of  Scotland  addressed  a 
letter  to  Edward  I.,  asking  his  advice  as  the  nearest 
relative  of  their  infant  Queen.  Sir  Francis  Pal- 
grave  was  the  first  to  point  out  that  civil  war  un¬ 
doubtedly  did  break  out  in  Scotland  immediately 
after  Alexander’s  death,  and  that  it  was  caused  by 
Robert  de  Brus,  Lord  of  Annandale,  advancing  his 


40 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1286  A. De¬ 


claim  to  the  throne.  Barbour,  Fordun,  and  other 
chroniclers  are  all  significantly  silent  on  this  head, 
but  they  did  not  write  till  long  after  the  Brucian 
settlement,  and  it  is  only  too  much  in  accord  with 
the  practice  of  historians  of  every  age,  and  especially 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  to  suppress  everything  that 
might  tell  to  the  discredit  of  the  reigning  house.  It 
is  strange,  however,  that  John  de  Balliol’s  averment, 
in  pleading  his  claim  to  the  Crown  before  King 
Edward,  has  received  so  little  attention  from  later 
historians.  He  there  alleged  that — 

“  When  the  bishops  and  great  men  of  Scotland  had  sworn  to  defend 
the  kingdom  for  their  Lady,  the  daughter  of  the  King  of  Norway, 

.  .  .  Sir  Robert  de  Brus  and  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  his  son, 

attacked  the  castle  of  Dumfries  with  fire  and  arms  and  banners  dis¬ 
played,  and  against  the  peace  expelled  the  forces  of  the  Queen  who 
held  the  same.  Hence  Sir  Robert  advanced  to  the  castle  of  Botil.* 
He  then  caused  a  proclamation  to  be  made  by  one  Patrick  M’Guffok 
within  the  bailary  of  the  said  castle.  .  .  Furthermore,  the  Earl 

of  Carrick,  by  the  assent  and  power  of  his  father,  took  the  Lady  of 
Scotland’s  castle  of  Wigtown,  and  killed  several  people  there.”  f 

Several  passages  may  be  quoted  from  the  Records 
to  prove  that  this  allegation  was  strictly  in  accord 
with  what  had  taken  place.  Sir  William  de  St. 
Clair,  Sheriff  ( vicecomes )  of  Dumfries,  reported  to  the 
Chancellor  that  the  lands  of  Bardonan  in  Galloway, 
a  royal  ward,  had  lain  uncultivated  for  two  years, 
because  of  the  war  ensuing  on  King  Alexander’s 
death. J  A  similar  report  wots  made  of  the  Crown 

lands  in  Wigtownshire  by  the  sheriff  of  that  county, 

- -  .1 

*Now  called  Buittle  ;  de  Balliol’s  residence  in  Galloway. 

f  Palgrave,  p.  lxxx. 

|  Exchequer  Rolls ,  i.,  35.  t 


1291  a.d.]  The  Disputed  Succession . 


4i 


John  Comyn,  Earl  of  Buchan,  with  the  further  note 
that  the  war  was  raised  by  the  Earl  of  Carrick.  * 
Again,  the  breaking  out  of  war  is  given  as  the 
reason  for  increased  expenditure  on  the  castles  of 
Dumfries,  Edinburgh,  Jedburgh,  and  Ayr,  in  the  year 
1286.  f  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  an  attempt  was 
made  at  this  time  to  seize  the  kingdom  for  Robert 
de  Brus,  whom  Alexander  II.  had  designated  as  his 
heir  in  1238.  On  September  20,  1286,  certain  nobles 
— Patrick,  Earl  of  March,  and  his  three  sons,  Walter 
Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  his  two  sons,  Robert 
de  Brus,  Lordof  Annandale,  and  his  two  sons  (Robert, 
Earl  of  Carrick,  and  Richard),  James  the  Steward  and 
his  brother  Sir  John  of  Bonkil,  Angus  Macdonald 
and  his  son — assembled  at  Turnberry  and  entered 
upon  a  bond  of  mutual  defence,  in  order  to  secure 
the  royal  succession  according  to  the  ancient  cus¬ 
toms  hitherto  observed  in  Scotland.^:  There  was 
not  the  slightest  reference  in  this  treaty  (which  is 
still  in  existence)  to  the  child-queen  Margaret,  no 
doubt  because  the  “ancient  customs”  did  not  per¬ 
mit  of  a  female  sovereign. 

It  must  be  left  matter  for  speculation  how  the 
civil  war  was  brought  to  a  close.  We  have  to  re¬ 
sume  the  course  of  events  in  1288,  when  the  num¬ 
ber  of  Guardians  was  reduced  from  six  to  four,  by 
the  assassination  of  the  Earl  of  Fife  by  Sir  Patrick 
Abercrombie  and  Sir  Walter  de  Percy,  and  the  death 
of  the  Earl  of  Buchan  about  the  same  time.  Mean¬ 
while,  the  far-sighted  sagacity  of  King  Edward  had 

*  Exchequer  Rolls ,  i.,  39.  \  Ibid.,  37,  38,  42,  44. 

X  Stevenson,  i.,  22. 


42 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1286  A.D.- 


conceived  the  statesmanlike  project  of  bringing  about 
the  union  of  England  and  Scotland  under  one  Crown, 
and  thus  laying  to  perpetual  rest  the  thorny  question 
of  the  suzerainty,  by  marrying  his  son  and  heir  to 
the  young  Queen  of  Scots.  With  this  end  in  view, 
he  entered  into  negotiations  with  King  Eric  of  Nor¬ 
way,  who  owed  him  a  large  sum  of  money,  and  was 
by  so  much  the  more  disposed  to  listen  to  Edward’s 
proposals.  The  four  Guardians  of  Scotland  dis¬ 
agreed  among  themselves,  probably  on  the  question 
of  the  projected  marriage,  which,  if  carried  into 
effect,  would,  of  course,  put  an  end  to  the  cherished 
schemes  of  the  parties  of  de  Brus  and  de  Balliol. 
King  Eric  sent  plenipotentiaries  in  1289  to  treat  with 
the  King  of  England,  who  appointed  the  Bishops  of 
Durham  and  Winchester  and  the  Earls  of  Pembroke 
and  Warenne  to  meet  them.  A  conference  took 
place  at  Salisbury  on  November  6th,  at  which  the 
Scottish  nation  was  represented  by  the  Bishops  of 
St.  Andrews  and  Glasgow,  Comyn,  Lord  of  Baden- 
och  (being  three  out  of  the  four  Guardians),  and 
Robert  de  Brus,  Lord  of  Annandale,  who  had  com¬ 
posed  their  differences  for  the  occasion.  Here  it 
was  agreed  on  the  part  of  the  Norwegians  that 
Queen  Margaret  should  be  conveyed  immediately, 
either  to  her  own  realm  of  Scotland,  or  to  England, 
but  free  from  all  matrimonial  engagement.  On  the 
part  of  the  English  it  was  agreed  that,  if  King 
Edward  received  Margaret  from  her  father,  he 
should  deliver  her  free  to  the  Scottish  people,  pro¬ 
vided  law  and  order  were  restored  in  that  country 
{quant  le  reaume  de  Escosse  serra  bien  asscure  et  en 


1291  A.D.] 


The  Disputed  Succession . 


43 


bon  pees ,  issi  ke  ele  i  puisse  seurement  venir  et 
demoreri)  *  A  further  clause  provided  that  the  Scots 
should  bind  themselves  under  security  to  the  King 
of  England  not  to  bestow  their  Queen  in  marriage, 
except  by  his  ordinance,  will,  and  advice,  and  with 
the  consent  of  King  Eric,  her  father.  Lastly,  the 
Scots  bound  themselves  to  restore  order  in  Scotland 
before  the  arrival  of  the  Queen  ;  to  give  security  for 
her  safety  and  freedom  ;  to  remove  any  of  the 
Guardians  or  ministers  of  Scotland  to  whom  the 
King  of  Norway  should  take  exception,  and  to 
replace  them  by  others  chosen  by  the  good  men  of 
Norway  and  Scotland.  In  the  event  of  disagree¬ 
ment,  King  Edward  was  to  appoint  commissioners 
to  decide  between  them. 

Now  it  will  be  seen  that  this  treaty  placed  the  matter 
pretty  completely  in  the  power  of  King  Edward,  nor, 
perhaps,  could  it  at  that  time  have  fallen  into  better 
hands.  He  was  honestly  anxious  to  bring  about 
the  best  conclusion  for  the  welfare  of  the  two 
kingdoms.  By  the  last-mentioned  article  it  was 
put  in  his  power  to  effect  the  removal  of  any  of 
the  Guardians  likely  to  prove  troublesome,  for  the 
King  of  Norway  was  so  heavily  in  his  debt  that  he 
would  be  ready  to  object  to  any  who  were  objec¬ 
tionable  to  Edward.  On  this  point  Lord  Hailes 
has  remarked  that,  as  three  of  the  four  Scottish  sig¬ 
natories  to  this  convention  were  Guardians  of  Scot¬ 
land,  this  proviso  was  designed  for  the  expulsion  of 
the  fourth  Guardian,  James  the  Steward.  But  Lord 


*  Feed  era. 


44 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1286  A.D. 


Hailes  was  writing  in  ignorance  of  the  war  which 
had  been  raised  by  the  party  of  de  Brus,  of  which 
James  had  been  an  active  member,  as  his  presence 
at  Turnberry  and  his  assent  to  the  league  had  proved. 
The  intention  of  this  provision  seems  to  have  been 
generally  to  prevent  any  one  of  the  Guardians  using 
his  official  power  to  further  schemes  contrary  to  the 
interests  of  the  Prince  of  England,  as  consort  of  the 
Queen  of  Scotland. 

Still,  nothing  was  expressed  in  this  treaty  about 
the  betrothal  of  the  Prince  and  the  Queen.  Ed¬ 
ward,  however,  had  already  sent  an  embassy  to  Pope 
Nicholas  IV.,  craving  the  necessary  dispensation. 
This  was  granted  on  November  16th,  and  the  news 
was  allowed  to  leak  out  that  it  had  been  obtained. 
As  soon  as  it  reached  Scotland,  the  four  Guardians, 
forty-four  ecclesiastics,  twelve  earls  (including  the 
Earl  of  Carrick),  and  forty-seven  barons,  signed  a 
letter  to  King  Edward,  expressing  a  hope  that  the 
rumour  was  true,  and  offering  their  hearty  consent 
to  the  alliance.  On  March  17th  they  addressed  a  let¬ 
ter  to  King  Eric,  praying  him  to  send  his  daughter 
to  be  married  to  Prince  Edward  of  England.  A 
month  later  King  Edward  wrote  to  King  Eric,  in¬ 
forming  him  that  he  had  obtained  the  Papal  dispen¬ 
sation,  and  requesting  him  to  send  Queen  Margaret 
to  him  in  England.  On  July  18,  1290,  a  memorable 
treaty  was  concluded  at  Birgham  on  the  Tweed,  de¬ 
fining  the  relations  between  England  and  Scotland 
in  the  event  of  the  marriage  taking  place. 

It  was  agreed,  among  other  things,  between  the 
English  and  Scottish  commissioners : 


1291  A.D.] 


The  Disputed  Succession . 


45 


“  That  the  rights,  laws,  liberties,  and  customs  of  Scotland  should 
remain  for  ever  entire  and  inviolable  .  .  .  that  the  kingdom  of 

Scotland  should  remain  separate  and  divided  from  England,  free  in 
itself  and  without  subjection,  according  to  its  right  boundaries  and 
marches  as  heretofore,  saving  always  the  right  of  the  King  of  Eng¬ 
land,  and  of  all  other  (rights)  which  before  the  date  of  this  treaty 
belonged  to  him,  or  any  of  them,  in  the  marches  or  elsewhere,  or 
which  tnay  justly  belong  to  him ,  or  any  of  them,  in  all  time  coming. 

Of  course,  the  two  phrases  printed  in  italics  were 
utterly  irreconcilable  with  each  other,  as  was  to  ap¬ 
pear  hereafter. 

Next,  on  August  28th,  Edward  appointed  Anthony 
Beck,  Bishop  of  Durham,  as  his  lieutenant  in  Scot¬ 
land  “  to  act  in  concert  with  the  Guardians,  and  by 
the  advice  of  the  prelates  and  nobles  of  the  realm.” 
Edward  further  demanded  that  all  the  fortresses  of 
Scotland  should  be  given  up  to  him  “  because  of 
certain  perils  and  suspicions  of  which  he  had 
heard.”  f  This  the  Scottish  commissioners  refused 
to  do,  but  they  undertook  to  hand  the  castles  over 
to  the  Queen  and  her  intended  consort  as  their  joint 
sovereigns.  J 

The  fair  project  for  the  union  of  the  two  kingdoms 
was  suddenly  shattered  by  a  calamity,  of  which  it  is 
impossible  to  write  without  chagrin,  even  after  the 
lapse  of  six  hundred  years. 

King  Edward  directed  a  large  ship  to  be  fitted 


*  Feeder  a. 

•j-  Ibid.  Purs  aucuns  perils  e  suspecons  que  il  avoyt  entendu. 
These  perils  aud  suspicions  were,  no  doubt,  the  attempt  by  de  Brus  s 
party,  and  probably  that  of  de  Balliol  also,  to  revert  to  the  ancient 
customs  of  Scotland,  and  set  aside  the  succession  of  a  female. 

X  Ibid. 


46 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1286  A.D.- 


out  at  Yarmouth  to  bring  the  Maid  of  Norway  over 
to  England.  The  victualling  and  decoration  were 
entrusted  to  the  King’s  chief  butler,  Matthew  de 
Columbariis — Matthew  of  the  dovecotes— and  the 
accounts  testify  that  this  was  done  on  a  scale  of  pro¬ 
fusion  befitting  the  rank  of  the  Queen  of  Scots. 
Besides  such  items  as  31  hogsheads  and  one  pipe  of 
wine,  12  barrels  of  beer,  15  carcases  of  oxen,  72 
hams,  400  dried  fish,  200  stockfish,  one  barrel  of 
sturgeon,  5  dozen  of  lampreys,  50  pounds  of  whale- 
flesh,  and  condiments  in  proportion,  there  was 
provided  a  little  store  of  dainties  for  the  special 
delectation  of  the  Maid ;  such  as  sugar,  walnuts, 
figs  and  raisins,  and  28  pounds  of  ginger-bread. 

The  Abbot  of  Welbeck,  Henry  de  Rye,  and  other 
messengers,  sailed  in  this  ship  from  Hartlepool  on 
May  9th,  arriving  in  Norway  on  the  25th.  What 
happened  afterwards  is  involved  in  mystery.  It  is 
certain  that  the  vessel  which  Edward  had  prepared 
with  so  much  care  for  his  future  daughter-in-law, 
returned  without  her.  Probably  King  Eric,  rather 
than  expose  his  daughter  to  the  long  voyage  to  the 
English  coast,  preferred  to  send  her  to  his  own  do¬ 
minion  of  Orkney.  That,  at  all  events,  was  the 
course  pursued.  But  it  is  part  of  the  irony  of 
history  that,  though  we  know  all  about  the  sweet¬ 
meats  provided  for  the  little  Maid,  and  may  even 
learn  how  much  of  them  was  eaten  by  the  mes¬ 
sengers,  and  wasted  by  the  crew,  of  the  manner  of 
the  end  of  the  Maid  herself  we  must  remain  in 
doubt.  King  Edward’s  ship  returned  on  June  17th, 
bringing  news  that  the  Queen  of  Scots  would  land 


1291  a.d.]  The  Disputed  Succession.  47 

in  Orkney,  and  be  received  there  by  the  Scottish 
commissioners.  Immediately  Edward  appointed  the 
Bishop  of  Durham,  the  Earl  of  Warenne,  and  the 
Dean  of  York  to  repair  to  meet  her  on  landing. 

Meanwhile  the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews  wrote  a 
letter  to  King  Edward  on  October  7th,  so  remarkable 
in  the  light  which  it  throws  on  the  attitude  of  de 
Brus  and  de  Balliol,  and  on  the  general  state  of 
Scotland  at  this  juncture  that,  although  it  has  often 
been  printed,  it  is  given  here  in  full  once  more. 


“  To  the  most  excellent  Prince  and  most  revered  Lord,  Sir  Edward, 
by  the  grace  of  God  most  illustrious  King  of  England,  Lord  of  Ire¬ 
land,  and  Duke  of  Guienne,  his  devoted  chaplain  William,  by  divine 
permission  humble  minister  of  the  Church  of  St.  Andrew  in  Scotland, 
wisheth  health  and  fortunes  prosperous  to  his  wishes,  with  increase  of 
glory  and  honour.  As  it  was  ordained  lately  in  your  presence,  your 
ambassadors  and  the  ambassadors  of  Scotland  who  had  been  sent  to 
you,  and  also  some  nobles  of  the  kingdom  of  Scotland,  met  at  Perth 
on  the  Sunday  next  after  the  Feast  of  St.  Michael  the  Archangel,  to 
hear  your  answer  upon  those  things  which  were  asked  and  treated  by 
the  ambassadors  in  your  presence.  Which  answer  of  yours  being 
heard  and  understood,  the  faithful  nobles  and  a  certain  part  of  the 
community  of  Scotland  returned  infinite  thanks  to  your  Highness. 
And  your  foresaid  ambassadors  and  we  set  ourselves  to  hasten  our 
steps  towards  the  parts  of  Orkney  to  confer  with  the  ambassadors  of 
Norway  for  receiving  our  Lady  the  Queen,  and  for  this  we  had  pre¬ 
pared  our  journey.  But  there  sounded  through  the  people  a  sorrow¬ 
ful  rumour  that  our  said  Lady  was  dead,  on  which  account  the 
kingdom  of  Scotland  is  disturbed.  And  the  said  rumour  being  heard 
and  published,  Sir  Robert  de  Brus,  who  before  did  not  intend  to 
come  to  the  said  meeting,  came  with  great  power  to  confer  with  some 
who  were  there  ;  but  what  he  intends  to  do,  or  how  to  act,  as  yet  we 
know  not.  But  the  Earls  of  Mar  and  Athol  are  collecting  their 
army,  and  some  other  nobles  of  the  land  are  drawing  to  their  party  ; 
and  on  that  account  there  is  fear  of  a  general  war  and  a  great  slaugh¬ 
ter  of  men,  unless  the  Highest,  by  means  of  your  industry  and  good 


48 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1286  A.D.- 


service,  apply  a  speedy  remedy.  My  lords  the  Bishop  of  Durham, 
Earl  Warenne,  and  I,  heard  afterwards  that  our  foresaid  Lady  recov¬ 
ered  of  her  sickness,  but  she  is  still  weak  ;  and  therefore  we  have  agreed 
among  ourselves  to  remain  about  Perth,  until  we  have  certain  news 
by  the  knights  who  are  sent  to  Orkney  what  is  the  condition  of  our 
Lady — would  that  it  may  be  prosperous  and  happy  ! — and  if  we  shall 
have  the  accounts  which  we  wish  about  her,  and  which  we  expect 
from  day  to  day,  we  will  be  ready  to  set  forth  for  carrying  out  the 
business  committed  to  us  to  the  best  of  our  power.  If  Sir  John  de 
Balliol  comes  to  your  presence,  we  advise  you  to  take  care  so  to  treat 
with  him  that  in  any  event  your  honour  and  advantage  be  preserved. 
If  it  turn  out  that  our  Lady  has  departed  this  life — and  may  it  not  be 
so  ! — let  your  excellency  deign  if  you  please  to  approach  towards  the 
March  for  the  consolation  of  the  Scottish  people,  and  the  saving  of 
the  shedding  of  blood,  so  that  the  faithful  men  of  the  kingdom  may 
keep  their  oath  inviolate,  and  set  over  them  for  King  him  who  of 
right  ought  to  have  the  succession,  if  so  be  that  he  will  follow  your 
counsel.  May  your  Excellency  have  long  life,  health  and  prosperity, 
and  happiness. 

“  Given  at  Leuchars  on  the  Saturday,  the  morrow  of  St.  Faith  the 
Virgin,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  1290.”  * 

There  will  be  occasion  to  refer  to  certain  passages 
in  the  bishop’s  letter  hereafter.  Meanwhile,  it  may 
be  remarked  that  it  is  the  only  known  contemporary 
document  in  which  allusion  is  made  to  an  event  of 
such  enormous  political  importance  as  the  death  of 
the  Queen  of  Scots.  Still  more  strange  is  it  that 
Barbour  makes  not  the  slightest  reference  to  the 
Maid  of  Norway’s  death,  although  it  was  the  circum¬ 
stance  from  which  arose  directly  the  events  he  under' 
took  to  record.  He  only  says  : 

Quhen  Alysandyre  the  King  was  dede, 

That  Scotland  had  to  ster  and  lede, 

The  Land  sex  yhere  and  mayr  perfay, 

Lay  desolate  eftyr  his  day.” 


*  National  A/SS.  of  Scotland ,  vol.  i.,  No.  70. 


1291  A.D.]  The  Disputed  Succession. 


49 


Fordun  says  the  Queen  died  in  1291,  and  Wyntoun 
gives  a  wholly  apocryphal  account,  how  that  Sir 
David  of  the  Wemys  and  Michael  Scot  of  Balwearie 
went  to  Norway  to  receive  the  Maiden,  to  conduct 
her  to  Scotland,  and  that  on  their  arrival  there  they 
found  that  she  had  been  put  to  death.  In  spite  of 
Bishop  Fraser  referring  to  it  as  merely  a  rumour,  it 
has  been  surmised  that  this  was  his  diplomatic  way 
of  alluding  to  a  circumstance  already  known  to  have 
taken  place.  There  was  wide-spread  suspicion  of  foul 
play.  It  was  known  to  be  against  the  interests  of 
more  than  one  powerful  individual  in  Scotland  that 
Margaret  should  be  crowned.  The  story  that  she 
had  been  kidnapped  was  almost  universally  believed 
in  Norway,  and  obtained  such  currency  elsewhere 
that  when,  ten  years  later,  in  1300,  a  German  woman, 
a  native  of  Lubeck,  gave  out  that  she  was  Margaret 
Queen  of  Scotland,  and  was  burnt  as  an  impostor  at 
Nordness  in  1309,  a  church  was  erected  on  the 
site  of  her  execution,  in  memory  of  the  “  martyred 
Maritte,”  as  people  called  her.  It  continued  for 
long  to  be  a  favourite  place  of  pilgrimage,  in  spite 
of  many  edicts  forbidding  all  persons  to  resort 
thither. 

But  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  Queen 
Margaret  did  die  in  Orkney,  in  the  presence  of  Bishop 
Narve  of  Bergen,  who  took  her  remains  back  to  Nor¬ 
way,  where  they  were  inspected  and  identified  by 
her  father. 

With  the  Maid  of  Norway’s  life  the  line  of  Alex¬ 
ander  was  extinguished,  and  no  provision  had  been 
made  for  the  succession  beyond  his  descendants. 


50 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1286  A.D.- 


There  was  no  scarcity  of  claimants  to  the  throne. 
Fordun’s  account  of  what  ensued  during  the  winter 
of  1290-91  is  probably  near  the  truth  : 


“  The  nobles  of  the  kingdom,  with  its  Guardians,  oftentimes  dis¬ 
cussed  among  themselves  the  question  who  should  be  made  their 
king  ;  but  they  did  not  make  bold  to  utter  what  they  felt  about  the 
right  of  succession,  partly  because  it  was  a  hard  and  knotty  matter  ; 
partly  because  different  people  felt  differently  about  those  rights,  and 
wavered  a  good  deal  ;  partly  because  they  justly  feared  the  power  of 
the  parties,  which  was  great,  and  partly  because  they  had  no  superior 
who  could,  by  his  unbending  power,  carry  their  award  into  execution 
or  make  parties  abide  by  their  decision.” 

In  short,  the  military  and  political  weight  of  the 
chief  claimants  was  so  nearly  balanced  that  any  de¬ 
cision  which  might  have  been  made  would  have  been 
the  signal  for  civil  war.  Matters  had  arrived  at  an 
impasse ,  and  any  attempt  to  solve  it  would  have 
caused  a  conflagration.  Under  these  circumstances, 
it  is  fair  to  enquire  whether  Bishop  Fraser  has 
merited  the  obloquy  which  has  been  heaped  on  his 
memory  because  of  his  letter  to  King  Edward. 

It  has  been  mentioned  above  that  dissensions  had 
arisen  early  among  the  four  surviving  Guardians  of 
the  realm.  The  supreme  authority  seems  to  have 
passed  into  the  hands  of  two  of  them,  the  Bishop  of 
St.  Andrews  acting  for  the  north,  and  John  Corny n 
acting  for  the  south.  On  the  death  of  the  Maid  of 
Norway,  the  policy  of  the  faction  which  these  two 
Guardians  represented  was  to  elevate  John  de  Balliol 
to  the  throne,  on  the  understanding  that  the  suze¬ 
rainty  of  England  should  be  acknowledged.  The 
Bishop’s  allusion  in  his  letter  to  “  the  faithful  men 


1291  A.D.] 


The  Disputed  Succession. 


51 


of  the  kingdom  keeping  their  oath  inviolate  ”  has 
always  been  interpreted  to  imply  submission  to  the 
claims  of  England,  though  it  is  possible  to  under¬ 
stand  therein  a  reference  to  the  allegiance  due  to  the 
legitimate  successor  of  Queen  Margaret,  implied  in 
the  oath  of  his  subjects  to  King  Alexander.  Even 
the  temperate  Hailes  talks  of  Bishop  Fraser’s  “dark 
and  dangerous  policy  ”  and  his  “  base  proposal.” 
The  fact  is  that  what  Scotland  stood  in  supreme 
need  of  at  this  juncture,  was  some  strong  and,  if  pos¬ 
sible,  disinterested  power,  to  protect  her  from  the 
violence  of  her  own  barons.  Fraser  was  desperately 
anxious  to  save  his  country  from  the  misery  of  civil 
war,  and  he  took  the  course  which  offered  the  most 
hopeful  means  of  doing  so,  by  communicating  with 
that  monarch  who  had  been  for  years,  and  was  at 
that  moment,  in  the  closest  and  most  friendly  diplo¬ 
matic  relations  with  the  Government  of  Scotland. 
The  sole  passage  in  this  celebrated  letter  which  lends 
itself  plausibly  to  the  imputation  of  underhand  deal¬ 
ing  between  the  King  of  England  and  the  party  rep¬ 
resented  by  the  bishop,  is  the  reference  to  the  choice 
of  a  king  “  that  will  follow  your  counsel.”  This,  see¬ 
ing  that  part  of  Edward’s  avowed  policy  had  been  to 
obtain  the  homage  of  the  Scottish  monarchy,  is  un¬ 
true  to  what  afterwards  came  to  be  the  principles 
and  sentiments  of  patriotic  Scotsmen  ;  but  it  is  im¬ 
possible  to  show  that  there  was  any  party  in  Scot¬ 
land  at  that  time  which  seriously  disputed  the  King 
of  England’s  claim.  The  executive,  in  the  name  of 
the  nation,  referred  the  dispute  to  him. 

Lord  Hailes  throws  discredit  on  the  statements  of 


52 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1286  A.D.- 


Fordun,  Hemingburgh,  and  others  that  the  invitation 
sent  to  Edward  I.  to  arbitrate  in  the  disputed  suc¬ 
cession  was  one  of  a  national  character.  He  was  not 
aware  of  the  appeal  made  on  behalf  of  the  Seven 
Earls  of  Scotland,  claiming  to  represent  the  pre-feu- 
dal,  and  therefore  the  true  constitution  of  the  realm.* 
This  is  an  instrument  containing  the  minutes  of  pro¬ 
ceedings  instituted  by  the  Seven  Earls,  and  con¬ 
ducted  for  them  by  procurators  appearing  before 
the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews  and  John  Comyn,  the 
operative  Guardians.  Herein  it  is  set  forth  that, 
according  to  the  ancient  laws  and  immemorial  usage 
of  the  kingdom  of  Scotland,  it  appertained  to  the 
rights  and  liberties  of  the  Seven  Earls  and  the 
“  Communitas  ”  of  the  realm,  whensoever  the  throne 
should  become  vacant,  to  constitute  the  King  and 
invest  him  with  all  the  functions  of  government. 
And  now,  the  throne  being  vacant  by  the  death  of 
Alexander  III.,  and  lest  the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews 
and  John  Comyn,  acting  as  Regents  of  Scotland, 
together  with  the  small  portion  of  the  “  Com¬ 
munitas  ”  adhering  to  them,  should  of  their  own 
authority  appoint  any  King  to  the  prejudice  of  the 
rights  of  the  Seven  Earls,  and  lest  also  John  de  Balliol 
should  intermeddle  in  the  kingdom  or  government  of 
Scotland,  appeal  was  hereby  made  to  Edward  King 
of  England,  on  account  of  the  injury  thus  received. 

After  further  protest  is  lodged  on  behalf  of  Donald 
Earl  of  Mar  against  the  damage  and  ravages  com¬ 
mitted  in  the  district  of  Moray  by  certain  deputies 


*  The  document  is  printed  in  full  in  Palgrave,  14-23. 


1291  A.D.] 


The  Disputed  Succession. 


53 


appointed  by  the  Guardians,  the  Seven  Earls  pro¬ 
ceed  to  appeal  in  the  name  and  on  behalf  of  Robert 
de  Brus,  Lord  of  Annandale,  claiming  the  Crown  as 
the  lawful  and  appointed  heir  of  King  Alexander. 
They  complain  that  the  Guardians,  uniting  with 
others  of  the  kingdom,  as  well  in  prejudice  of  the 
rights  of  de  Brus  as  in  violation  of  the  privileges  of 
themselves  as  the  Seven  Earls,  had  intended  to 
appoint  John  de  Balliol  to  the  vacant  throne. 
Wherefore  he,  Robert  de  Brus,  so  appearing  by  his 
procurator,  appeals  to  the  presence  of  Edward  King 
of  England,  and  inhibits  the  proceedings  of  the 
Guardians,  until  the  judgment  of  the  said  King  can 
be  obtained. 

Commenting  further  on  Hemingburgh’s  statement 
that  the  invitation  to  Edward  was  an  act  on  the 
part  of  the  Scottish  nation,  Lord  Hailes  says  he  does 
not  doubt  that  many  of  the  nobles,  instigated  by 
Bishop  Fraser,  may  have  invited  the  intervention 
of  England ;  “  but,”  says  he,  “  I  see  no  sufficient 
evidence  that  the  measure  was  national .”  Seeing, 
however,  that  not  only  the  Scottish  Guardians,  but 
the  more  ancient  constitutional  body  of  the  Seven 
Earls,  independently  took  the  same  course,  it  surely 
partook  as  much  of  the  nature  of  a  national  act  as 
the  constitution  of  the  nation  admitted.  It  is  easy 
for  a  historian  to  write  about  the  “  general  consent  ” 
of  a  nation,  but  it  is  not  so  easy  to  prove  that  it  is 
more  than  a  mere  phrase.  No  provision  for  a  plebi¬ 
scite  existed  under  the  feudal  system,  and  it  is  im¬ 
possible  to  imagine  that  the  commonalty  were  able 
to  take  any  intelligent  interest  in  the  question  of 


54 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


Cl 286  A.D.- 


succession  to  the  throne.  The  estates,  indeed,  were 
held  to  represent  the  people,  and  they  took  a  keen 
interest  in  the  matter,  but  they  were  in  no  degree 
representative  in  our  modern  acceptation  of  that 
term.  The  national  will  was  interpreted  by  the  acts 
of  a  narrow,  and  chiefly  alien,  aristocracy,  consisting 
of  prelates  and  barons  ;  and  the  fact  that  the  com¬ 
monalty  of  Scotland,  many  years  after  this,  ratified 
the  act  of  de  Brus,  representing  one  of  many  com¬ 
petitors,  in  seizing  the  Crown,  is  not  enough  to  con¬ 
vict  either  Fraser  and  his  colleagues  or  the  Seven 
Earls  of  bad  faith  or  want  of  patriotism,  because 
they  took  measures  to  prevent  de  Balliol  or  de  Brus, 
or  any  other  competitor,  dragging  the  country  into 
civil  war  in  support  of  his  claim. 

In  the  act  of  inviting  Edward  to  arbitrate  there  was 
nothing  to  compromise  the  independence  of  Scotland. 
It  was  the  practice  at  that  time  to  settle  controversies 
of  this  nature  by  reference  to  a  foreign  prince.  Ed¬ 
ward’s  reputation,  both  as  a  statesman  and  a  knight, 
stood  high  ;  he  had  already,  by  the  project  of  mar¬ 
riage  of  his  son  to  the  Queen  of  Scots,  shown  him¬ 
self  well  disposed  to  the  northern  kingdom  ;  and  the 
two  parties  in  Scotland  adopted  the  most  hopeful 
way  out  of  the  crisis.  But  in  the  transactions  which 
followed,  it  soon  became  clear  that  the  first  use  the 
King  of  England  intended  to  make  of  his  opportunity 
was  to  settle  in  his  own  favour  the  venerable  dispute 
about  the  suzerainty.  It  happened  to  be  a  burning 
question  with  him  just  at  the  time,  for  he  was  at  war 
with  the  King  of  France,  who  claimed  his  homage 
for  the  duchy  of  Aquitaine. 


1291  A.D.] 


The  Disputed  Succession . 


55 


A  conference  between  the  prelates  and  barons  of 
Scotland  on  one  side,  and  King  Edward  and  his 
ministers  on  the  other,  took  place  at  Norham,  on  the 
English  bank  of  the  Tweed,  on  May  io,  1291.  It 
was  opened  by  a  memorable  speech  on  the  part  of 
the  King  of  England,  composed  in  Latin  by  William 
Hotham,  Provincial  of  Predicant  Friars,  and  deliv¬ 
ered  in  French  by  Roger  le  Brabazom,  Justiciary  of 
England.  It  announced  the  King  s  acceptance  of 
the  office  of  arbitrator,  “  out  of  his  good-will  and 
affection  to  the  whole  nation,  and  to  each  individual 
in  it  ;  for  in  their  defence  he  himself  was  interested.” 
He  had  come,  he  said,  as  Superior  and  Lord  Para¬ 
mount  of  the  kingdom  of  Scotland,  and  he  required, 
as  a  preliminary  act,  that  they  should  acknowledge 
him  as  such. 

The  Scots  requested  time  to  consider  such  a 
weighty  demand  ;  they  were  given  twenty-four 
hours.  Next  day  they  asked  for  further  delay. 
Edward  granted  them  three  weeks,  by  which  time 
his  demand  would  be  emphasised  by  a  display  of 
force,  for  he  had  summoned  the  barons  of  northern 
England  to  assemble  at  Norham,  cum  armis  et  equis , 
on  June  3d.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  among  his  Eng¬ 
lish  lieges  thus  called  to  arms,  there  were  included 
two,  at  least,  of  the  competitors,  namely,  Robert  de 
Brus  and  John  de  Balliol. 

Besides  these  military  preparations,  Edward  took 
pains  to  collect  historical  evidence  in  support  of  his 
claim  to  the  suzerainty,  and  it  is  impossible  for  any 
impartial  person  to  doubt  the  sincerity  of  his  desire 
not  to  exceed  what  he  believed  to  be  his  just  rights. 


56 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1286  A.D.- 


Religious  houses  were  considered  then  the  only 
authentic  repositories  of  such  material,  and  orders 
had  been  sent  to  all  of  them  to  extract  and  cite 
every  recorded  instance  of  homage  done  by  the 
Kings  of  Scotland  to  those  of  England.  These  re¬ 
ports  had  been  read  at  the  preliminary  conference 
on  May  ioth,  and  they  remain  to  this  day  an  inter¬ 
esting  medley  of  historical  fact  and  monkish  legend. 
All  the  instances  of  partial  conquest  of  Scottish  ter¬ 
ritory  by  Saxon,  Danish,  and  Norman  kings,  fol¬ 
lowed  by  homage  done  by  the  vanquished,  were 
herein  recited,  down  to  the  treaty  of  Falaise,  by 
which  William  the  Lion,  in  order  to  regain  his  free¬ 
dom,  surrendered  the  independence  of  his  kingdom. 
But  no  mention  was  made  of  the  treaty  of  Canter¬ 
bury  whereby  it  was  restored  by  Richard  Cceur  de 
Lion  ;  of  the  clause  in  Magna  Charta  defining  the 
rights  of  the  Scottish  kings  ;  nor  of  the  recent  obli¬ 
gation  entered  into  by  Edward  himself  at  Birgham, 
to  respect  the  independence  of  Scotland.  The  last, 
at  any  rate,  must  have  been  fresh  in  the  recollection 
of  all  present. 

The  conference  re-assembled  on  June  2d,  this  time 
on  Scottish  soil,  at  Upsettlington,  on  the  north  bank 
of  the  Tweed.  Eight  of  the  claimants  to  the  throne 
were  present,  but  not  John  de  Balliol,  who  said  he 
had  mistaken  the  day. 

The  others  were  : 

1.  Robert  de  Brus,  Lord  of  Annandale. 

2.  Florence,  Count  of  Holland. 

3.  John  de  Hastings,  Lord  of  Abergavenny. 

4.  Patrick  de  Dunbar,  Earl  of  March. 


1291  A.D.] 


The  Disputed  Succession. 


57 


5.  William  de  Ros. 

6.  William  de  Vesci  (appearing  by  attorney). 

7.  Robert  de  Pinkeny. 

8.  Nicholas  de  Soulis. 

The  Bishop  of  Bath  recited  the  proceedings  at  the 
former  assembly,  and  added,  in  reference  to  the  his¬ 
torical  researches  commanded  by  the  King,  that- 
“  by  various  evidences,  it  was  sufficiently  apparent 
that  the  English  kings  were  Lords  Paramount  of 
Scotland,  and  from  the  most  distant  ages  had  either 
claimed  or  possessed  that  right ;  that  Edward  had 
required  the  Scots  to  produce  their  evidences  or 
arguments  to  the  contrary,  and  had  declared  himself 
ready  to  admit  them  if  they  were  stronger  than  his 
own.  .  .  .  That  as  the  Scots  had  produced 

nothing,  the  King  was  resolved,  as  Lord  Paramount, 
to  determine  the  question  of  the  succession.”  Then 
the  competitors  were  called  on  to  declare  their 
concurrence. 

Robert  de  Brus  was  first  asked  if  he  acknowledged 
the  King  of  England  as  Lord  Paramount  of  Scot¬ 
land,  and  whether  he  was  willing  to  ask  and  receive 
judgment  of  him  in  that  character.  De  Brus  gave 
his  assent  “  definitely,  expressly,  publicly,  and 
openly,”*  and  the  other  competitors  present  an¬ 
swered  these  questions  in  the  same  way. 

Next  day,  June  3d,  John  de  Balliol  made  his  ap¬ 
pearance,  and,  having  explained  the  cause  of  his 
absence  at  the  appointed  time,  was  asked  if  he  was 
ready  to  make  the  same  answer  as  the  others.  After 


*  Finaliter,  expresse,  publice  et  aperte. — Fxdera. 


58 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1286  A.D.- 


some  deliberation — merely  formal,  because  he  must 
have  known  what  was  coming  * — he  replied  that  he 
was. 

The  English  Chancellor  then  announced  that, 
although  King  Edward  “  now  asserted  his  right  of 
superiority,  with  the  view  of  giving  judgment  be¬ 
tween  the  competitors,  he  must  not  be  held  to 
relinquish  his  right  of  property  in  the  kingdom  of 
Scotland,  which  might  be  claimed  hereafter  in  fit 
manner  and  time  convenient/’  It  is  not  clear 
whether  this  ambiguous  phrase  referred  to  his  legiti¬ 
mate  claim  to  the  earldoms  of  Lothian  and  Scottish 
Cumbria,  for  which  homage  had  been  so  long  and 
persistently  claimed,  or  to  the  groundless  claim  to 
property  in  the  Scottish  realm  as  a  whole. 

The  competitors  then  set  their  seals  to  the  follow¬ 
ing  acknowledgment : 

Forasmuch  as  the  King  of  England  has  evidently  shown  to  us 
that  the  sovereign  seignory  of  Scotland,  and  the  right  of  determining 
our  respective  pretensions,  belong  to  him,  we,  therefore,  of  our  own 
free  will  and  without  compulsion,  have  agreed  to  receive  judgment 
from  him  as  our  Lord  Paramount,  and  we  become  bound  to  submit 
to  his  award.”  f 

Besides  the  nine  competitors  named  above,  four 
others  subsequently  submitted  their  claims  on  Au¬ 
gust  3d,  namely,  Eric  King  of  Norway,  John  Comyn 
Lord  of  Badenoch,  Roger  de  Mandeville,  and  Patrick 
Galythly.  It  is  remarkable,  as  shewing  how  com¬ 
plete  was  the  Norman  ascendency  in  the  ancient 
land  of  the  Gael  and  Piet,  that  although  all  these 
thirteen  competitors  for  the  throne  of  Scotland 
claimed  in  virtue  of  descent  from  daughters  or  sis- 

*  Congrua  deliberatione  praehabita. — Feeder  a.  \  Feeder  a. 


1291  A.D.] 


The  Disputed  Succession. 


59 


ters  of  Scottish  kings  (except  King  Eric,  who  founded 
on  being  the  heir  of  his  own  daughter),  only  one, 
Patrick  Galythly,  was  indeed  a  native  Scot. 

The  claims  of  eleven  of  the  thirteen  competitors 
require  no  consideration  here.  From  the  first,  those 
of  John  de  Balliol  and  Robert  de  Brus  were  recog¬ 
nised  as  the  most  important,  and  were  taken  into 
consideration  at  once. 

Each  of  these  two  was  called  on  to  nominate  forty 
commissioners,  who,  with  twenty-four  appointed  by 
the  King,  were  to  deliberate  on  the  pleadings  and 
make  their  report  to  him.  The  claims  of  the  other 
competitors,  though  not  withdrawn,  were  suspended 
until  after  the  decision  between  de  Brus  and  de 
Balliol. 

On  June  4th  all  the  competitors  consented  to  the 
surrender  of  the  kingdom  of  Scotland  and  its  for¬ 
tresses  into  Edward’s  hands,  on  the  pretext  (for  it 
could  have  been  nothing  but  a  quibble)  that,  inas¬ 
much  as  the  bestowal  of  the  kingdom  had  been 
placed  in  his  hands,  he  could  not  bestow  that  which 
he  did  not  possess.  Restitution  was  to  be  made 
within  two  months  from  the  delivery  of  his  award. 
This  surrender  was  carried  into  effect  on  June  nth, 
whereupon  Edward  immediately  restored  the  cus¬ 
tody  of  the  kingdom  to  the  four  Guardians,  and  the 
castles  to  the  keepers.  The  only  Scottish  official 
who  made  the  slightest  difficulty  over  this  manoeuvre 
was  Gilbert  de  Umfraville,  Earl  of  Angus,  who  de¬ 
manded  and  received  an  indemnity  from  King 
Edward  before  he  would  consent  to  deliver  up  his 
castles  of  Dundee  and  Forfar. 


6o 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1286  A.D.- 


The  Scottish  nobles  and  prelates,  on  June  nth, 
presented  Alan,  Bishop  of  Caithness,  as  a  fit  Chan¬ 
cellor,  and  Edward  appointed  him,  with  his  own 
clerk,  Sir  Walter  de  Amundesham,  as  colleague. 
He  also,  on  June  13th,  appointed  Brian  fitz  Alan  as 
an  associate  with  the  four  Guardians,  who  now  held 
their  commission  as  regents  from  him  as  Overlord. 
These  regents,  with  twenty-seven  other  earls  and 
barons  of  Scotland,  then  swore  fealty  to  Edward  on 
the  Holy  Evangels,  and  proceedings  were  adjourned 
till  August  2d. 

Nothing  could  be  more  formal  and  complete  than 
the  absolute  renunciation  of  Scottish  independence 
which  had  now  been  performed.  Upon  Balliol  and 
Bishop  Fraser  has  been  laid,  by  common  consent  of 
all  Scottish  historians,  the  odium,  not  only  of  being 
foremost  in  obsequious  compliance  with  Edward’s 
pretensions,  but  in  subsequently  resisting  the  national 
effort  to  regain  independence.  But  in  truth  the  rec¬ 
ords  admit  of  no  difference  in  this  respect  between 
the  competitors  at  this  period.  They  and  the  Guar¬ 
dians  were  unanimous  in  acknowledging  Edward’s  su¬ 
periority,  and  if  there  was  any  party  in  Scotland 
of  a  contrary  view,  no  trace  remains  of  any  protest 
having  been  made  at  this  time.  If  the  proceedings 
at  Norham  and  Upsettlington  were,  as  Lord  Hailes 
maintains,  chapters  in  a  disgraceful  history,  then  the 
disgrace  must  be  shared  by  all  Scotsmen  who  took 
part  in  them.  Their  acts  were  the  acts  of  the  nation, 
as  far  as  the  constitution  of  the  kingdom  admitted 
of  any  act  being  national ;  nor  is  it  easy  to  point  out 
how  they  could  have  acted  differently.  Dissensions 


1291  A.D.] 


The  Disputed  Succession. 


6 1 


among  themselves  rendered  war  against  Edward, 
who  was  the  liege  lord  of  most  of  them  for  their 
English  possessions,  a  hopeless  enterprise ;  in  yield¬ 
ing  voluntary  submission  they  were  anticipating  the 
submission  which  must  have  been  forced  from  them 
after  a  bloody  contest.  It  is  a  bitter  thing  for  a 
Scotsman,  even  at  this  distance  of  time,  to  have  to 
admit  that  his  country  was  helpless  before  the  King 
of  England’s  pretensions,  but  so  it  was.  The  fierce 
detestation  of  Edward  of  England,  which  genera¬ 
tions  of  Scotsmen  have  learned  to  cherish,  had  no 
existence  at  the  time  of  the  proceedings  of  Upset- 
tlington ;  it  arose  out  of  subsequent  events.  Hith¬ 
erto  he  had  been  regarded,  not  as  an  aggressive 
tyrant,  but  as  a  powerful  friend  of  Scotland,  nearly 
related  in  blood  to  the  lost  line  of  Malcolm  Can- 
more,  and  the  most  likely  authority  to  deliver  the 
realm  from  the  evils  of  a  disputed  succession.  That 
he  should  exact  a  substantial  fee  for  his  services  as 
arbitrator,  might  be  regretted,  but  there  was  no 
power  to  resist  the  demand.  If  this  state  of  things 
be  lost  sight  of,  no  clear  view  can  be  obtained  of  the 
momentous  events  of  these  years. 


Comyn,  Earl  of  Buchan.  Sir  Aymer  de  Valence. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  REIGN  OF  JOHN  DE  BALLIOL. 

A.D.  1291-1296. 

THE  commissioners  appointed  in  June  to  de¬ 
cide  the  merits  of  the  respective  claims  of  de 
Brus  and  de  Balliol,  adjourned  till  August 
2d,  when  they  re-assembled  at  Berwick.  Their 
proceedings  have  been  so  minutely  examined  and 
reported  on  by  previous  writers,  that  there  is  no 
occasion  here  to  do  more  than  briefly  recapitulate 
the  grounds  on  which  they  gave  their  verdict. 
Pleadings  on  behalf  of  the  two  competitors  were 
opened  at  Berwick  on  June  2,  1292,  and  continued 
till  June  25th. 

John  de  Balliol  claimed  as  the  son  of  Devorguila, 
daughter  of  Margaret,  eldest  daughter  of  the  Earl  of 
Huntingdon,  the  youngest  brother  of  Malcolm  IV. 
and  William  the  Lion.  He  was,  therefore,  great- 
grandson  of  the  Earl,  and  great-grand-nephew  of 
two  Kings  of  Scotland. 

Robert  de  Brus  claimed  as  the  son  of  Isabella, 

62 


1291-96  a.d.]  The  Reign  of  John  de  Balliol.  63 


second  daughter  of  the  said  Earl  of  Huntingdon.  He 
was,  therefore,  grandson  of  the  Earl,  and  grand¬ 
nephew  of  the  two  Kings.* 

It  was  a  nice  question,  and  one  that  had  never,  up 
to  that  time,  been  decided  in  feudal  law,  whether 
the  succession  ought  to  devolve  on  the  more  remote 
by  one  degree  in  descent  from  the  elder  sister  (de 
Balliol),  or  on  the  nearer  in  degree  from  the  younger 
(de  Brus).  So  completely  had  Scotland  become 
feudalised,  that  although  the  question  involved 
was  one  of  descent  from  her  Celtic  monarchy,  the 
ancient  Celtic  law  of  Tanistry,  by  which  succession 
had  been  wont  to  be  regulated,  does  not  seem  to 
have  been  so  much  as  mentioned.  Under  that  law, 
succession  went  by  descent  from  a  common  ancestor, 
but  choice  had  to  be  made  by  the  people  of  a  man 
come  to  years  fit  for  war  and  council,  instead  of  the 
infant  son  or  grandson  of  the  last  king. 

The  commissioners,  having  no  precedent  to  guide 
them,  felt  unable  to  create  one.  They  reported  to 
the  King  on  August  12th,  that  they  had  not  been 
able  to  come  to  an  agreement  upon  the  question 
submitted  to  them,  and  declared  “  that  they  would 
not  presume  to  give  their  advice  in  such  a  high 
matter  without  hearing  the  better  judgment  of  the 
prelates,  nobility,  and  other  wise  men  of  England.” 

The  sitting  was  again  adjourned,  and  Edward  sum- 

*  John  de  Hastings,  grandson  of  Ada,  the  third  daughter,  was  a 
competitor  also  ;  but  he  only  claimed  one  third  of  the  kingdom,  on 
the  ground  that,  like  other  inheritances,  it  was  divisible.  His  claim 
was  disposed  of  by  the  preliminary  decision  that  the  kingdom,  unlike 
other  inheritances,  was  indivisible. 


64 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1291  A.D.- 


moned  a  Parliament  to  meet  at  Berwick  on  October 
15,  1292.  Three  questions  were  submitted  for  its 
decision  on  behalf  of  the  King  of  England,  to  all  of 
which  Parliament  returned  unanimous  answers.  The 
tenour  of  these  answers  threw  upon  the  King  the 
responsibility  of  decision  in  the  matter  under  dis¬ 
pute,  according  to  the  laws  and  usages  of  his  king¬ 
doms.  If  no  such  laws  and  usages  existed,  or  if  they 
differed  in  England  and  Scotland,  then  he  should 
create  new  ones,  with  the  advice  of  Parliament.  The 
succession  to  the  Crown  should  be  regulated  in  the 
same  way  as  succession  to  earldoms,  baronies,  and 
other  indivisible  inheritances. 

Next,  on  November  6th,  the  two  claimants-in-chief 
were  heard  at  great  length  and  in  great  detail ;  after 
which,  all  the  other  competitors,  except  de  Hastings, 
having  finally  withdrawn  their  claims,  King  Edward 
proceeded  to  deliver  judgment  on  November  17th. 

“As  it  is  admitted  that  the  kingdom  of  Scotland  is  indivisible,  and 
as  the  King  of  England  must  judge  the  right  of  his  subjects  accord¬ 
ing  to  the  laws  and  usages  of  the  kingdoms  over  which  he  reigns  ; 
and  as  by  the  laws  and  usages  of  England  and  Scotland  in  the  suc¬ 
cession  to  indivisible  heritage,  the  more  remote  in  degree  of  the  first 
line  of  descent  is  preferable  to  the  nearer  in  degree  of  the  second, 
therefore  it  is  decreed  that  John  de  Balliol  shall  have  seisine 
of  the  realm  of  Scotland  .  .  .  saving  always  the  right  of  the  said 

King  of  England  and  his  heirs,  whenever  they  shall  choose  to  put  it 
forward.” 

It  is  beyond  all  question  that,  according  to  the 
law  of  primogeniture,  as  it  has  since  been  interpreted 
and  as  it  would  take  effect  at  the  present  day,  this 
was  an  equitable  decision.  This  law,  however,  was 
not  firmly  established  at  that  time,  and  the  Scottish 


1296  a.d.]  The  Reign  of  John  de  Balliol. 


^5 


chroniclers  do  not  hesitate  to  impute  bad  faith  to 
Edward  in  pronouncing  judgment.  Fordun  and 
Wyntouti  declare  that  the  commissioners  delivered 
their  award  in  favour  of  de  Brus,  but  that  the  Bishop 
of  Durham  dissuaded  the  King  from  ratifying  it, 
because  de  Brus  would  prove  far  too  powerful  a 
monarch.  They  allege  further,  that  the  Earl  of 
Gloucester  stood  before  King  Edward,  holding  his 
kinsman,  de  Brus,  by  the  hand,  and  cried :  “  Recol¬ 
lect,  O  King !  what  kind  of  judgment  thou  hast 
given  this  day  ;  and  know  that  thou  must  be  judged 
at  the  last.”  But  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that 
Edward  saw  in  de  Balliol  a  more  pliant  vassal  than 
in  the  aged  de  Brus.  Bishop  Fraser,  at  all  events, 
had  put  him  as  much  on  his  guard  against  one  as 
against  the  other. 

Of  a  truth  there  is  not  a  shred  of  evidence  to 

support  the  allegation  that  de  Brus  expressed  any 

dissent  from  the  award,  whatever  may  have  been 

his  private  feelings  and  those  of  his  partisans.  Of 

far  greater  significance  is  the  fact  that,  in  giving  his 

award,  Edward  made  no  reference  to  that  part  of  de 

Brus’s  case  which,  though  the  strongest  of  all,  has 

been  overlooked  or  set  aside  by  all  subsequent 

critics,  until  Sir  Francis  Palgrave  pointed  out  its 

true  bearing  on  the  question.  It  was  part  of  de 

Brus’s  pleadings,  that  in  1238,  when  King  Alexander 

II.  was  in  declining  years,  despairing  of  any  issue  of 

his  body,  he  did  with,  and  by  the  assent  of  the  probi 

homines  of  his  kingdom,  acknowledge  and  designate 

the  Lord  of  Annandale  to  be  his  lawful  heir,  as 

being  nearest  of  blood  to  himself.  Many  of  the 
5 


66 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1291  A.D.- 


barons  who  took  part  in  this  parliamentary  act  being 
still  alive  in  1292,  de  Brus  claimed  that  they  should 
be  examined  in  support  of  his  averment.  De  Bal- 
liol’s  answer  to  this  was  that,  inasmuch  as  Alexander 
II.  had  died  seised  of  the  kingdom,  and  transmitted 
it  by  his  death  to  a  son,  not  in  existence  at  the  time 
he  designated  de  Brus  as  his  heir,  no  right  could 
remain  with  Robert  de  Brus  in  virtue  of  such  desig¬ 
nation.  Of  our  historians,  Brady,  Tyrrel,  Hume, 
Turner,  and  Lingard  are  alike  totally  silent  in  regard 
to  this  remarkable  part  of  de  Brus’s  claim.  Tytler 
mentions  it,  but  without  comment ;  Carte  denounces 
it  as  “  a  mere  pretence.”  Lord  Hailes  enters  with 
some  minuteness  into  its  discussion,  but  concludes 
against  its  validity  on  grounds  somewhat  extraor¬ 
dinary  for  such  a  high  judicial  authority  to  take 
up.  He  says  that  de  Balliol’s  answer  ought  to  have 
been  that  the  opinion  and  act  of  Alexander  II.  could 
not  vary  the  rules  of  succession,  and  that  “the  con¬ 
stitution  of  Scotland,  and  the  fate  of  the  competitors, 
must  not  depend  upon  the  testimony  of  witnesses 
concerning  words  cursorily  heard  more  than  a  cen¬ 
tury  ago.  .  .  .  The  situation  of  Alexander  II. 

renders  it  incredible  that  he  ever  uttered  the  words 
ascribed  to  him  by  Bruce,  and  which  he  pretends  to 
prove  by  the  evidence  of  witnesses,  certainly  super¬ 
annuated,  and  probably  not  impartial.” 

But  in  fact  Alexander’s  act  was  a  proceeding  far 
more  deliberate  and  constitutional  than  Lord  Hailes 
suspected.  Since  that  writer  compiled  his  Annals , 
the  appeal  of  the  Seven  Earls,  above  quoted,  has 
come  to  light ;  by  which  it  appears  that  the  line  of 


1296  A. D.i  The  Reign  of  John  de  BallioL 


67 


defence  recommended  by  Hailes  was  not  open  for 
de  Balliol  to  take.  So  far  from  Alexander’s  words 
having  been  “  cursorily  ”  uttered  or  heard,  they  were 
spoken  in  and  ratified  by  the  National  Assembly. 


“  The  Great  Council  being  assembled  together,  they  decreed  and 
adjudged  by  all  their  own  laws,  and  by  the  imperial  and  other 
laws,  that  the  son  born  of  the  second  sister  should  inherit  in 
preference  to  the  daughter  born  of  the  eldest  sister.  And  all 
present,  Clergy  as  well  as  Laity,  unanimously  declared  the  same 
as  the  true  judgment  of  the  King.  Such  judgment  having  been 
given  by  the  Great  Council  and  accepted  by  the  Sovereign,  he, 
King  Alexander,  took  Robert  de  Brus,  Lord  of  Annandale  who 
now  is,  by  the  hand,  and  presented  him  to  all  the  nobles  and  mag¬ 
nates,  clerks,  and  laymen  then  and  there  present,  as  his  true  and 
legitimate  heir  to  the  kingdom  of  Scotland  ;  and  all  such  magnates, 
by  the  King’s  command  and  in  his  presence,  took  the  oath  of  fealty 
to  the  Lord  Robert  de  Brus  upon  the  Holy  Gospels.  And  this  act 
or  deed  was  duly  recorded  upon  the  rolls  of  the  Treasury  of  Scot¬ 
land  :  but  the  memorialists  know  not  into  whose  hands  it  has 
fallen.”* 

One  cannot  but  suspect  that,  had  the  Lord  of 
Annandale  been  less  heavily  stricken  in  years — 
“superannuated,”  to  use  Lord  Hailes’s  expression, 
— this  part  of  his  claim  would  have  been  more 
stoutly  supported.  The  fact  that  he  had  received 
the  fealty  of  certain  barons  of  Scotland  then  living, 
is  quite  enough  to  account  for  the  rising  in  his 
favour  on  the  death  of  the  Maid  of  Norway,  and 
certainly  puts  that  transaction,  hitherto  so  obscure, 
in  a  less  ambiguous  light.  Nor  can  it  have  been 
absent  from  the  thoughts  of  Annandale’s  grandson, 

*  Palgrave,  Introduction  xvii.,  and  pp.  14-24,  where  the  appeal  of 
the  Seven  Earls  will  be  found  printed  at  length. 


68 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1291  A.D.- 


the  greater  de  Brus,  when  he  resolved,  after  long 
hesitation,  to  enforce  his  claim  to  the  throne. 

Power  was  taken  in  the  settlement  for  the  King 
of  England  to  interfere  as  Lord  Paramount,  in  the 
event  of  de  Balliol  neglecting  to  rule  his  people 
justly.  On  November  19,  1292,  the  kingdom  and 
castles  of  Scotland  were  handed  over  to  King  John. 
On  the  following  day  he  did  fealty  to  King  Edward  ; 
the  great  seal  used  by  the  Guardians  was  broken  in 
pieces,  and  the  fragments  deposited  in  the  English 
Treasury,  in  token  of  the  superiority  of  England 
over  Scotland.  It  did  not  take  long  to  cut  a  new 
seal,  for  the  impression  thereof  remains  attached  to 
King  John’s  letters  patent,  written  from  Newcastle- 
on-Tyne  on  December  24th,  announcing  to  the  Scot¬ 
tish  people  the  fact  that  he  had  sworn  fealty  to 
King  Edward  on  November  20th  foregoing.* 

The  coronation  took  place  at  Scone  on  St.  An¬ 
drew’s  Day  (November  30th),  and  once  more  King 
John  did  homage  for  his  kingdom,  on  December 
26th,  at  Newcastle-on-Tyne.  The  national  manu¬ 
scripts  of  Scotland  were  delivered  to  the  new  King, 
and  an  indenture  taken.  Most,  if  not  all,  of  these 
papers,  which  would  now  be  of  incalculable  value, 
have  since  perished. 


*  A  large  round  seal  in  green  wax.  Obverse  :  the  King  in  chain 
mail  and  surcoat,  barred  helmet  crowned,  and  sword  in  hand,  riding 
to  sinister.  The  Scottish  lion  rampant  double  and  tressure  are 
on  the  shield  and  housings.  Reverse  :  the  King  on  a  carved  seat, 
sceptred.  At  dexter  side,  a  shield  charged  with  an  orle  (Balliol)  ;  at 
the  sinister,  one  with  a  lion  rampant  (Galloway).  Legend  on  both 
sides  :  Johannes  Dei  Gratia  Rex  Scottorum. 


1296  a.d.]  The  Reign  of  John  de  Balliol, 


69 


On  January  2,  1293,  King  John  issued  letters 
patent,  releasing  King  Edward  from  all  writings, 
agreements,  promises,  obligations,  and  penalties 
entered  into  during  the  time  that  the  realm  of 
Scotland  was  in  his  hands.  It  is  notable  that  neither 
the  seal  of  de  Brus  of  Annandale,  nor  that  of  his  son 
the  Earl  of  Carrick,  is  to  be  found  among  those  of 
the  Earls  of  Buchan,  March,  Angus,  and  Athol, 
John  Comyn  of  Badenoch,  and  many  others  ap¬ 
pended  to  this  document. 

In  depositing  this  instrument  in  Westminster, 
Edward  executed  a  notarial  protest,  the  tenour  of 
which  soon  brought  about  a  strain  on  the  unworkable 
relations  between  the  two  Kings.  It  was  to  the  effect 
that  the  King  of  England  was  not  to  be  hindered  by 
any  interim  promises  already  made  from  doing  justice 
in  appeals  brought  before  his  Court  from  Scotland.* 
Consequently,  in  October  of  the  first  year  of  John’s 
reign,  proceedings  were  taken  at  Westminster  on  the 
appeal  of  Macduff,  descended  of  a  former  Earl  of 
Fife,  against  the  judgment  of  the  Bishop  of  St. 
Andrews,  by  which  he  had  been  dispossessed. 
There  was  also  appeal  made  in  another  case,  that 
of  a  burgess  of  Berwick.  Further,  on  April  2,  1294, 
King  Edward,  as  Overlord  of  Scotland,  required  his 
“  beloved  and  faithful  ”  f  John,  King  of  Scotland,  to 
appear  at  Westminster  to  answer  to  the  claim  of 
John  Mazun,  a  merchant  of  Gascony,  for  wines,  etc., 


*  Bain,  ii. ,  155. 

f  Ibid.,  160.  “  Beloved”  was  an  afterthought  ;  “  magnifico prin- 

cipi  ” — magnificent  prince — was  written  first,  scored  out,  and  “  di*> 
lecto  ”  substituted. 


7o 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1291  A.D.' 


supplied  to  the  deceased  King  Alexander,  to  the 
amount  of  £2,000,  and  not  paid  for.  Moreover,  this 
summons  was  served  upon  King  John  in  the  most 
peremptory  fashion,  by  the  hands  of  the  Sheriff  of 
Northumberland.*  Besides  this  indignity,  King  John 
had,  in  the  previous  year,  received  Edward’s  com¬ 
mands  to  serve  on  the  justice  eyre  of  Yorkshire,  just 
as  if  he  had  been  any  ordinary  subject.  John  wrote 
to  remonstrate  against  this  duty  being  expected  of 
him,  f  but  it  does  not  appear  that  he  obtained 
exemption,  for  events  shortly  took  an  acute  turn. 

On  June  29th,  Edward,  whose  orders  always  ap¬ 
peared  under  his  title  as  Overlord  of  Scotland,  com¬ 
manded  John,  King  of  Scots,  to  join  him  in  London, 
on  September  1st,  with  eighteen  of  the  magnates  of 
Scotland,  for  operations  against  King  Philip  IV.  of 
France.  Now  it  was  plainly  intolerable,  under  any 
circumstances,  that  Scotland  should  be  obliged  to 
send  forth  her  King,  whom  it  had  cost  her  so  much 
trouble  to  get,  and  the  flower  of  her  chivalry,  to  fight 
the  private  quarrels  of  the  King  of  England.  But  it 
happened  to  be  peculiarly  inconvenient  at  that  par¬ 
ticular  moment,  as  King  Edward  was  probably  fully 
aware,  for  de  Balliol  (his  reign  was  so  short  and  in¬ 
glorious  that  it  is  hardly  necessary  to  refer  to  him  as 
King  John  any  more)  had  entered  into  secret  nego¬ 
tiations  with  Philip.  He  had,  no  doubt,  been  con¬ 
vinced  by  the  proceedings  in  the  appeal  cases  that 
his  relations  with  Edward  could  not  endure  very 


*  Bain,  160. 
f  Ibid.,  157. 


1296  a.d.]  The  Reign  of  John  de  BallioL 


7i 


long,  so  he  sagaciously  set  about  cultivating  the 
friendship  of  Edward’s  foe. 

De  Balliol  paid  no  attention  to  Edward’s  sum¬ 
mons.  The  secret  treaty  with  Philip  must  have 
come  to  Edward’s  ears  before  its  publication  on 
October  23,  1295,  for  on  the  16th  orders  were  issued 
for  the  seizure  of  all  de  Balliol’s  lands  and  goods  in 
England,  as  well  as  those  of  all  Scotsmen  who  re¬ 
mained  in  Scotland.*  De  Balliol,  strong  in  the 
sense  of  his  offensive  and  defensive  alliance  with  the 
King  of  France,  at  last  threw  down  the  gauntlet  to 
Edward.  He  wrote,  in  October,  1295,  complaining 
of  the  injuries  inflicted  on  his  subjects,  the  violent 
occupation  of  his  castles  and  possessions,  the  slaughter 
and  imprisonment  of  the  merchants  and  other  men 
of  his  realm ;  wherefore  he  renounced  the  homage 
“  extorted  from  him  by  violence.”  f  No  doubt 
this  was  technically  an  act  of  rebellion,  for  both  de 
Balliol  and  his  barons  had  sworn  fealty  to  the  King 
of  England.  The  “  violence  ”  referred  to  could  only 
mean  Edward’s  display  of  force  at  the  conference  of 
Upsettlington. 

Both  countries  now  prepared  for  war.  On  March 
14,  1296,  King  Edward  received  the  homage  of  the 
Earl  of  Lennox  and  ninety  others,  landowners  in 
Scotland.  Robert  de  Brus,  the  Competitor,  was 
dead,  having  departed  from  this  stormy  scene,  a 
very  old  man,  before  May,  1295  ;  X  but  Edward  had, 


*Bain,  ii. ,  166. 
\  Ibid.,  167. 

\  Ibid.,  164. 


72 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1291  A.D.' 


in  October  of  the  same  year,  appointed  his  son, 
known  in  future  controversy  as  Robert  de  Brus  “le 
viel,”  governor  of  the  important  castle  of  Carlisle.* 
Strangely  enough,  it  fell  to  his  lot  to  strike  the  first 
blow  for  the  monarch  whose  decision  had  shut  him 
out  from  the  throne  of  Scotland ;  for  the  army  of 
de  Balliol  invaded  Cumberland  on  March  26th,  and 
invested  Carlisle  on  the  28th.  Here,  too,  were  the 
Bruce  and  the  Corny n  first  arrayed  in  battle  against 
each  other  ;  for  John  Comyn,  Earl  of  Buchan,  com¬ 
manded  de  Balliol’s  forces,  and  John  Comyn,  son  of 
the  Lord  of  Badenoch,  and  the  same  who  after¬ 
wards  fell  by  the  dagger  of  Robert  I.,  marched  with 
him. 

The  attack  on  Carlisle  was  repulsed,  and  Buchan 
turned  eastward,  making  a  bloody  raid  on  Tynedale, 
burning  Hexham  and  Corbridge  (April  8th),  and, 
according  to  English  accounts,  perpetrating  horrible 
cruelties.  It  is  stated  in  a  notarial  instrument  sub¬ 
sequently  drawn  up  on  King  Edward’s  behalf,  that 
“  Herodian  ”  barbarities  were  committed  by  the 
Scots  on  pregnant  women,  and  that  two  hundred 
“  little  clerks  ”  (school-boys)  were  burnt  in  the 
schools  at  Corbridge.  f  Possibly  this  atrocious 
course  was  adopted  in  reprisal  for  what  had  been 
enacted  at  Berwick,  which  King  Edward  stormed 
on  March  30th,  massacring  the  inhabitants  without 
distinction  of  age  or  sex. 

The  sack  of  Berwick  claims  more  than  passing 


*  Bain,  ii. ,  166. 
f  Ibid. ,  ii.,  217. 


1296  a.d.i  The  Reign  of  John  de  Balltol. 


73 


notice,  so  deeply  has  it  stained  the  reputation  of 
Edward  I.  In  the  whole  course  of  the  War  of  Inde¬ 
pendence  there  was  enacted  nothing  to  approach  the 
horror  of  it. 

The  King  of  England  crossed  the  Tweed  below 
Coldstream  on  March  28th  ;  the  Bishop  of  Durham 
crossing  with  another  contingent  lower  down,  at 
Norham.  An  attack  by  the  English  fleet  had,  some 
days  previous,  been  repulsed  by  the  people  of  Ber¬ 
wick  with  a  loss,  says  Fordun,  of  no  fewer  than 
eighteen  ships  burnt,  and  their  crews  slain. 

The  combined  English  forces  having  been  drawn  up 
under  the  walls  of  Berwick,  the  town  was  summoned 
to  surrender.  Edward  waited  twenty-four  hours  for 
an  answer  ;  when  it  came,  it  was  a  proud  lefusal.  He 
then  withdrew  towards  Coldstream,  where  he  en¬ 
camped.  As  was  customary  before  an  important 
engagement,  a  grand  parade  was  held  for  the  creation 
of  knights.  Henry  de  Percy  was  the  most  distin¬ 
guished  of  those  so  honouied  on  this  occasion. 
The  Admiral  of  the  English  fleet,  which  was  lying 
off  Berwick,  seeing  the  army  in  battle  array,  con¬ 
cluded  that  an  immediate  assault  had  been  ordered, 
and  prepared  to  co-operate.  Entering  the  river,  his 
foremost  vessel  went  aground,  as  did  three  others. 
All  were  burnt  by  the  Scots,  and  the  crews  were 
killed. 

This  was  followed  by  the  storming  of  the  town  by 
the  English.  It  is  said  that  the  assailants  were 
greatly  infuriated  by  derisive  verses  shouted  at  them 
from  the  ramparts.  Of  these  the  various  versions 
preserved  seem,  if  anything,  deficient  in  salt,  but 


74 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1291  A.D.- 


doubtless  they  carried  their  sting  at  the  time.  Here 
is  one  of  them  : 

“  Kyng  Edward ! 

wanne  thu  hauest  Berwic, 
pike  the  ! 
wanne  thu  hauest  geten, 
dike  the  !  ” 

The  defences  of  the  town  were  weak  and  resistance 
was  soon  overcome.  The  Earl  of  Cornwall’s  brother 
Richard,  raising  his  visor  to  get  a  better  view  of  the 
yielding  foe,  was  struck  in  the  forehead  by  a  dart 
and  killed.  This  greatly  enraged  the  King,  who 
incontinently  gave  the  order  “  No  quarter!”  The 
slaughter  went  on  for  two  whole  days.  Scottish 
historians  agree  with  the  English  writer,  Walter  of 
Hemingburgh,  in  putting  the  number  of  those  slain 
at  between  seven  and  eight  thousand.  Wyntoun 
says  that  what  brought  the  massacre  to  an  end  at 
last,  was  that  Edward  himself  saw  a  woman,  in  the 
act  of  childbirth,  being  put  to  the  sword.  At  this 
horrible  sight  he  turned  away,  crying  “  Laissez, 
laissez !  ” 

The  Flemish  merchants  of  Berwick  possessed  a 
strong  building  called  Aula  Rubra,  or  the  Red  Hall. 
By  their  charter  they  were  bound  to  defend  this  to 
the  last  against  the  English.  Right  well  did  the 
gallant  fellows  fulfil  their  engagement.  They  held 
out,  after  the  town  had  been  taken,  till  evensong, 
when  the  English  set  fire  to  their  Red  Hall,  and  its 
thirty  defenders  all  perished  in  the  flames. 

The  garrison  of  the  castle  were  allowed  to  depart, 
after  swearing  they  would  never  again  bear  arms 


1296  a.d.]  The  Reign  of  John  de  Balliol, 


75 


against  England  ;  but  their  commander,  Sir  William 
de  Douglas,  surnamed  “  le  Hardi,”  was  kept  a 
prisoner. 

If  Edward  intended  to  strike  terror  among  those 
whom  he  regarded  as  his  rebellious  subjects,  and  to 
crush  the  resistance  to  his  rule  by  a  display  of  in¬ 
human  severity,  never  did  a  ruler  more  hugely  mis¬ 
calculate  a  result.  He  was  to  learn  the  same  lesson 
which  many  of  his  successors  had  to  lay  to  heart — 
that  Scotsmen  may  be  led,  but  they  will  never  be 
driven. 

But  the  Scots  had  not  yet  found  a  leader  whom 
they  could  follow.  The  cause  of  de  Balliol  was  lost 
at  the  battle  of  Dunbar,  where,  on  April  28th,  the 
Earl  of  Warenne  won  a  complete  victory.  King 
Edward  then  began  a  progress  through  Scotland, 
exacting  fealty  from  the  nobles,  and  receiving  their 
renunciation  of  homage  to  de  Balliol  and  of  the 
French  alliance. 

James  the  Steward  of  Scotland  surrendered  Rox¬ 
burgh  Castle  on  May  13th,  and  swore  on  the  Gospels 
to  aid  King  Edward  against  “John  de  Balliol,  late 
King  of  Scotland.”  *  For  Edward  understood  well 
how  to  play  off  the  Bruce  party  against  the  Balliol. 


*  Palgrave,  152.  From  James  the  Steward  afterwards  came  the 
royal  house  of  Stuart,  by  the  marriage  of  his  son  Walter  the  Steward 
with  Marjorie,  daughter  of  Robert  I.  The  title  of  the  office  became 
hereditary  as  a  surname  ;  but  it  is  curious  to  remember  its  early  ety¬ 
mology,  i.  e.,  the  Anglo-Saxon  stige  ward — sty  ward,  master  of  the 
hogs.  An  important  office  in  primitive  times,  the  term  became 
applied  to  the  seneschal,  or  head  of  the  royal  household,  and  thence 
to  the  chief  officer  of  State. 


7  6 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1291  A.D.- 


The  true  weakness  of  the  national  cause  lay,  at  this 
time,  in  the  civil  dissension  of  the  kingdom.  But 
for  that,  King  Edward,  whose  hands  were  full  enough 
with  the  troubles  connected  with  his  French  domin¬ 
ions,  might  not  have  been  disposed  to  concern  him¬ 
self  in  Scottish  affairs.  Fordun  attributes  the  loss 
of  the  battle  of  Dunbar  to  the  action  of  the  Earls  of 
Mar  and  Athol,  who,  “  through  good  will  and  love 
for  Bruce,”  left  the  field  without  striking  a  blow,  and 
lejoiced  at  the  calamity  which  fell  on  the  arms  of 
“  the  Comyns  and  their  whole  abettors,”  who  stood 
for  Balliol.  “  But,  alas  !  ”  he  adds,  with  well-founded 
regret,  “through  this  quarrel  the  harmless  rabble, 
exposed  to  the  ravenous  bite  of  these  wolves,  lay 
mangled  far  and  wide  over  the  land.”  * 

The  same  chronicler  also  has  a  story  how  Edward, 
in  order  to  secure  the  support  of  Robert  de  Brus,  the 
Competitor  s  son,  did  about  this  time  promise  to 
place  him  on  the  Scottish  throne  in  place  of  Balliol  ; 
and  how,  on  de  Brus  claiming  this  promise  after  the 
battle  of  Dunbar,  the  King  impatiently  exclaimed  : 

Ne  avonis  ren  autres  chose  a  fer,  que  a  vous 
reaymys  ganere  ?  ” — “Have  we  nothing  else  to  do 
but  win  realms  for  you  ?  ”  But,  as  has  been  shown 
above,  de  Brus  was  already  Edward’s  man,  being  at 
this  moment  the  governor  of  Carlisle.  De  Balliol, 
too,  had  taken  the  surest  means  to  alienate  de  Brus 
from  his  cause.  After  the  sack  of  Berwick,  he  had 
declaied  all  the  partisans  of  England,  and  all  neutrals, 
to  be  traitors,  and  their  lands  confiscated.  He  be- 


*  Fordun,  xciii. 


1296  A. D.]  The  Reign  of  John  de  BallioL 


77 


stowed  de  Brus’s  lordship  of  Annandale  upon  Comyn, 
Earl  of  Buchan,  who  is  believed  actually  to  have  en¬ 
tered  on  possesssion  of  Lochmaben  Castle. 

The  fact  is,  this  Robert  de  Brus  “  le  viel  ”  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  a  very  strong  character  in  any 
respect.  There  was  a  more  promising  instrument 
for  Edward’s  purpose  in  Robert  de  Brus  “  le 
jovene  ”  or  “  le  jeune,”  and  upon  him  the  Eng¬ 
lish  monarch  laid  the  duty  of  receiving  back  to  his 
peace  the  people  of  Annandale  and  Carrick.  This 
young  knight,  grandson  of  the  Competitor  and,  in 
right  of  his  mother  who  died  in  1292,  Earl  of  Car¬ 
rick,  was  now  in  his  twenty-second  year. 

Thus  the  first  appearance  in  history  of  the  re¬ 
storer  of  Scottish  monarchy,  was  in  the  pay  of  the 
King  of  England,  resisting  the  national  party. 

De  Balliol’s  abdication  has  generally  been  dated 
July  2,  1296,  the  date  of  certain  letters  patent,  in 
which  he  confessed  his  offences  against  his  liege  lord 
Edward,  and  delivered  to  him  the  Scottish  kingdom 
and  people.*  But  this  instrument  was  alleged  by 
Fordun,  on  the  authority  of  Baldred  Bissett,  the 
Scottish  envoy  at  Rome,  to  be  a  forgery  ;  and  the 
fact  that  it  is  not  recorded  in  the  Ragman  Roll  seems 
to  confirm  this.  But  no  suspicion  attaches  to  an¬ 
other  document  executed  at  Stracathro  on  July  7th, 
attesting  the  renunciation  by  de  Balliol  of  his  treaty 
with  the  King  of  France ;  or  to  another  done  at  Bre¬ 
chin  on  the  10th,  whereby  he  made  resignation  of 
his  kingdom  and  people,  and  of  his  royal  seal.  The 


*  Feeder  a* 


78 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


CI291  A.D.- 


latter  he  enclosed  in  a  little  purse  under  his  privy 
seal,  and  delivered  to  the  Bishop  of  Durham  on  be¬ 
half  of  the  King  of  England.* 

Thus  closed  the  reign  of  King  John  of  Scotland, 
which  had  lasted  three  years  and  seven  months,  and 
a  second  interregnum  began,  though  successive  Re¬ 
gents  continued  to  act  in  the  name  of  the  late  King. 

•  The  subsequent  movements  of  the  luckless  ex- 
King  may  be  traced  in  the  Public  Records  of  Eng¬ 
land.  His  first  place  of  captivity  was  Hertford, 
where  he  remained  till  August,  1297.  He  was 
allowed  to  amuse  himself  in  hunting,  was  provided 
with  a  suitable  retinue,  and  received  seventeen  shil¬ 
lings  a  day  for  sustenance.  From  Hertford  he  was 
transferred  to  the  greater  security  of  the  Tower. 
Even  there  he  was  not  debarred  from  reasonable 
pleasure.  His  household  contained  two  esquires, 
one  huntsman  and  his  page,  a  barber,  a  chaplain,  a 
steward,  a  butler,  two  chamberlains,  a  clerk  of  the 
chapel,  a  washerwoman,  and  three  lads.  He  had 
horses,  no  doubt,  and  mention  is  made  of  two  grey¬ 
hounds  and  ten  hounds. 

He  remained  an  inmate  of  the  Tower  till  August, 
1299,  when  King  Edward  summoned  him  to  his 
presence  at  Canterbury.  Edward  was  then  nego¬ 
tiating  a  treaty  of  peace  with  the  King  of  France, 
and  Rinaldo,  Bishop  of  Vincenza,  was  the  Pope’s 
delegate  for  furthering  the  accomplishment  thereof 
Balliol  was  committed  to  the  custody  of  this  prelate 
the  result  being  that  he  was  taken  to  France,  and 


*  Bain,  ii. ,  188. 


1296  a. d.]  The  Reign  of  fohn  de  Bcdliol. 


79 


moved  successively  from  Wissant  to  Cambrai,  from 
Cambrai  to  Chatillon,  and  from  Chatillon  to  a  castle 
belonging  to  the  abbot  of  Cluni,  whence  he  was  for¬ 
bidden  to  remove  without  special  leave.  But  in 
1302  he  was  allowed  to  return  to  his  paternal  estates 
in  Picardy,  where  he  lived  till  his  death,  which  did 
not  take  place  before  1315.* 

King  Edward  advanced  as  far  north  as  Elgin. 
Strict  discipline  was  maintained  in  his  forces  ;  no 
private  plundering  was  allowed,  for  it  was  now  his 
role  to  conciliate  a  conquered  people.  But  in  token 
of  the  complete  subjection  of  the  country,  the  King 
caused  the  Coronation  Stone  to  be  removed  from 
Scone  to  Westminster,  where  it  has  remained  to  this 
day.f  Besides  this,  he  caused  to  be  sent  to  London 
a  number  of  the  national  jewels,  relics,  etc.  ;  and, 
most  important  of  all,  one  large,  and  two  small 


*  Stevenson,  Introduction,  xlix. 

f  The  Scottish  Stone  of  Destiny  is  a  small  block  of  red  sandstone, 
with  a  few  imbedded  pebbles,  which  may  now  be  seen  under  the  coro¬ 
nation  chair  of  British  Sovereigns  in  Westminster  Abbey.  It  was 
associated  with  the  mythical  origin  of  the  Scottish  nation,  being  re¬ 
ported  to  have  served  the  patriarch  Jacob  as  a  pillow,  to  have  been 
taken  next  to  Spain,  where  it  made  the  justice  seat  of  Gathelus,  the 
contemporary  of  Moses.  This  worthy  was  said  to  have  married  Scota 
the  daughter  of  Pharaoh  and  was  reputed  the  eponymus  of  the  Gaedhal 
or  Gael.  With  the  Gaels  it  was  brought  to  Ireland,  whence  Fergus, 
first  King  of  Dalriadic  Scots  removed  it  to  Dunstafifnage  in  Argyle- 
hire.  Kenneth  II.  removed  it  with  him  to  Scone,  and  all  the 
Scottish  kings  were  crowned  on  it  till  1293.  In  carrying  it  to  West¬ 
minster,  Edward,  no  doubt,  hoped  for  the  fulfilment  of  an  ancient 
prophecy,  that  wherever  the  Stone  of  Destiny  went,  the  monarchy  of 
Scotland  would  go  also.  And  so  it  has,  but  not  in  the  sense  that 
Edward  supposed. 


8o 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1291  A.D.- 


coffers,  filled  with  documents,  no  doubt  the  records 
of  the  kingdom.* 

Of  King  Edward’s  tour  in  the  north,  many  inter¬ 
esting  details  have  been  preserved  in  the  Placita 
Roll  of  his  army.  But  there  is  one  that  transcends 
them  all,  as  being,  in  all  probability,  the  first  public 
mention  of  an  individual  whose  name  was  soon  to  be 
written  large  in  the  annals  of  his  country.  At  the 
gaol  delivery  of  Perth  on  August  8th,  Matthew  of 
York  was  accused  of  entering  the  house  of  a  woman, 
in  company  with  a  thief,  one  William  le  Waleys 
(Wallace),  and  robbing  her  of  3^.  worth  of  beer.f 
Matthew  was  a  priest  and  claimed  benefit  of  clergy. 
Wallace  seems  to  have  escaped  arrest,  for  he  was  not 
in  the  gaol.  It  is  not  possible  to  affirm  the  identity 
of  this  le  Waleys  with  the  patriot,  but  it  is  not  im¬ 
probable,  and  this  escapade  at  Perth  may  account 
for  the  known  fact  that  William  Wallace  was  an  out¬ 
law  when  he  made  his  appearance  in  the  national 
cause. 

King  Edward  held  a  Parliament  at  Berwick  in  this 
year,  which  has  become  famous  from  having  pro¬ 
duced  the  document  known  as  the  Ragman  Roll. 
This  was  a  submission  to  Edward  as  King  of  Scot¬ 
land,  and  it  was  signed  by  nearly  two  thousand 
Scottish  landowners  and  ecclesiastics,  among  whom 
were  practically  all  those  who  afterwards  fought 
on  the  Scottish  side  in  the  war  of  independence. 
Robert  de  Brus  “  le  viel  ”  and  Robert  de  Brus  “  le 


*  Bain,  ii. ,  221. 
\  Ibid.,  ii.,  191. 


I 


*296  A.D.]  The  Reign  of  John  de  Balliol.  81 

jeovene,”  Earl  of  Carrick,  signed  on  August  28th. 
One  famous  name  may,  however,  be  sought  for  in 
vain.  There  are  three  le  Waleyses  from  Ayrshire 
and  one  from  Berwick  ;  but  whether  he  was,  as  has 
been  reported,  an  outlaw  at  this  time  for  man¬ 
slaughter,  or  whether  he  was  already  resolved  on 
armed  resistance,  or  for  both  reasons,  William 
Wallace  the  Patriot  never  bowed  the  knee  to  King 
Edward.  Perhaps  it  is  not  necessary  to  look  further 
for  cause  of  the  absence  of  his  signature  from  the 
roll  than  the  fact  that,  being  neither  a  landowner 
nor  otherwise  of  importance,  he  was  not  required  to 
sign. 

As  for  the  young  Earl  of  Carrick,  he  stood  high  in 
royal  favour  at  this  time,  for,  on  October  15th,  the 
King  commanded  his  debts  to  be  “  attermed  ”  in  the 
easiest  way  for  him,  “  for  the  great  esteem  he 
[Edward]  has  for  the  good  service  of  Robert  de 

Brus,  Earl  of  Carrick.” 

6 


Sir  Henry  de  Percy. 


Sir  Robert  de  Clifford. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  CAMPAIGN  OF  WALLACE. 


A.D.  1296-1298. 


PRACTICALLY,  the  whole  of  Scotland  had 
now  owned  allegiance  to  Edward  I.,  and  it 
only  remained  for  him  to  keep  what  he  had 
won.  He  left  for  the  south  in  the  early  autumn  of 
1296,  having  appointed  John  de  Warenne,  Earl  of 
Surrey,  keeper  of  the  realm,  Hugh  de  Cressingham 
treasurer,  and  William  de  Ormesby  justiciar.  Dis¬ 
turbance  broke  out  shortly  after  Edward’s  depart¬ 
ure,  for  on  January  31,  1297,  Surrey  received  strict 
orders  to  allow  no  man  to  quit  Scotland,  cleric 
or  layman,  and  to  arrest  anyone  found  carrying 
letters. 

This  was  probably  the  beginning  of  the  rising 
under  Wallace.  Of  the  origin  and  youth  of  this 
celebrated  man,  very  little  is  known,  though  much 
has  been  reported.  His  biographer,  Blind  Harry, 
lived  about  two  centuries  later,  and  his  ballad,  full 
as  it  is  of  manifest  inaccuracy  and  untruth,  is  almost 

82 


1296-98  a.d.]  The  Campaign  of  Wallace.  83 


valueless,  except  as  showing  what  history  had  be¬ 
come  in  that  time  under  the  influence  of  popular 
tradition.  His  work  can  only  be  regarded  as  an 
attempt  to  recite  the  story  as  Scotsmen  of  the  fif¬ 
teenth  century,  reared  in  incessant  warfare  with 
England,  would  have  liked  it  to  be. 

Fordun,  writing  only  eighty  years  after  Wallace 
had  won  immortal  renown,  says  vaguely  that 
“  though  among  the  earls  and  lords  of  the  kingdom 
he  was  looked  upon  as  low-born,  yet  his  fathers  re¬ 
joiced  in  the  honours  of  knighthood.  His  elder 
brother,  also,  was  girded  with  the  knightly  belt,  and 
inherited  a  landed  estate  which  was  large  enough  for 
his  station.” 

The  name  “  le  Waleys  ”  means  “the  Welshman,” 
but  that  would  apply  to  a  family  belonging  to 
Strathclyde,  which  was  part  of  ancient  Cumbria  or 
Wales,  as  distinguished  from  Scotland  proper.  The 
accepted  opinion  is,  that  William  was  the  younger 
son  of  Malcolm  le  Waleys  of  Ellerslie  near  Paisley, 
and  that  he  got  into  trouble  early  from  an  irregular 
course  of  life.  Blind  Harry’s  story  is  that  when 
William  was  at  school  at  Dundee,  the  English  gover¬ 
nor,  Selby,  seeing  the  lad  dressed  in  a  fine  suit  of 
green,  asked  him  how  he  dared  to  wear  “  so  gay  a 
weed,”  and  tried  to  take  his  knife  from  him,  upon 
which  Wallace  “  stiket  him  to  the  dead,  for  all  his 
men  that  ’ssembled  round  him.” 

After  many  wanderings  and  adventures,  Wallace 
got  back  to  his  mother  at  Ellerslie.  She  induced 
her  brother,  Sir  Rainald  de  Crauford,  King  Edward’s 
sheriff  of  Ayr,  to  obtain  from  Sir  Henry  de  Percy, 


84 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1296  A.D.- 


Warden  of  Galloway  and  Ayr,  a  protection  for  her 
son,  and  he  was  sent  to  Sir  Walter  Wallace  of 
Richardstoun.  One  day  William  had  caught  a  lot 
of  fish  in  the  Irvine,  which  were  taken  from  him  by 
a  party  of  five  soldiers  riding  past  with  the  Warden. 
Wallace  struck  one  of  them  with  his  fishing-rod,  and 
made  him  drop  his  sword,  which  the  lad  seized  and 
killed  the  soldier  withal.  The  others  closed  round 

him,  but  Wallace  wounded  one  in  the  head,  cut  off 

•  ' 

the  sword  hand  of  another,  and  the  remaining  pair 
galloped  after  de  Percy,  crying  to  him  “  to  abide 
and  revenge  his  men,  who  were  being  cruelly 
martyred  here  in  this  false  region/'  Percy  asked 
how  many  had  attacked  them,  and,  on  hearing  there 
was  but  one,  he  laughed  and  vowed  that  “  by  him 
this  day  he  should  not  be  sought.” 

Now  all  this  is  clearly  of  the  nature  of  fable,  and 
it  is  only  quoted  here  as  an  instance  of  the  sort  of 
stuff  to  be  found  in  Blind  Harry.  He  credits  his 
hero  with  a  number  of  murders,  killing  Englishmen 
wherever  he  came  across  them. 

There  is  much  confusion  among  the  different 
accounts  of  the  rising  against  the  English  which 
took  place  in  the  spring  of  1297.  According  to 
the  Chro?iicle  of  Lanercost ,  usually  a  trustworthy 
authority,  it  was  begun  by  Bishop  Wishart  of  Glas¬ 
gow  and  James  the  Steward.  Hailes,  following  the 
popular  legend,  attributes  it  to  Wallace  and  Sir 
William  de  Douglas.  Wallace  would  not  be  influ¬ 
ential  enough  to  cause  the  rising,  but  undoubtedly 
he  took  an  active  part  in  it.  Prominent  among  the 
insurgents  were  young  Andrew  de  Moray,  afterwards 


1298  A. d.]  The  Campaign  of  Wallace. 


85 


Wallace’s  colleague  in  command  of  the  movement. 
Robert  de  Brus  “  le  viel  ”  was  still  governor  of  Car¬ 
lisle,  and  thither  the  young  Earl  of  Carrick  was  sum¬ 
moned,  and  made  to  swear  on  the  consecrated  host 
and  the  sword  of  Becket  that  he  would  be  faithful 
and  vigilant  in  the  service  of  King  Edward.  He 
proved  his  sincerity  forthwith,  by  making  a  raid  on 
the  lands  of  Sir  William  de  Douglas  ;  but,  according 
to  Hemingburgh,  promptly  repented,  delared  that 
this  oath  had  been  extorted  from  him  by  force,  and 
joined  the  Scottish  insurgents. 

Wallace  at  this  time  was  under  arms  in  Clydes¬ 
dale.  He  surprised  and  slew  the  King’s  sheriff  at 
Lanark,  Andrew  de  Livingston.  *  Sir  Thomas 
Gray  of  Hetoun  was  then  an  esquire  under  the 
sheriff’s  command,  and  his  son  has  given,  in  his 
Scalacronica ,  an  account  of  the  affair,  which  he  often 
must  have  heard  his  father  relate.  It  is  not,  how¬ 
ever,  so  ample  as  might  be  desired,  for  Gray  was 
severely  wounded  in  the  melee,  stripped,  and  left  for 
dead.  The  heat  of  two  burning  houses,  one  on  each 
side  of  him,  kept  life  in  him  till  the  dawn,  when  Wil¬ 
liam  de  Lundy  found  him  and  took  him  to  shelter.^ 

The  rising  speedily  gained  strength.  Edward  was 
on  the  point  of  sailing  for  Flanders,  but  he  had  an 
able  lieutenant  in  the  Earl  of  Surrey.  Sir  Henry  de 
Percy  and  Sir  Robert  de  Clifford  advanced  against 
the  insurgents,  and  found  them  encamped  near 

*  He  is  usually  called  Heselrig,  which  was  probably  the  name  of 
his  lands  in  Scotland,  but  Andrew  de  Livingstone  was  sheriff  in  1396- 
— Bain,  ii. ,  264,  417. 

\  Scalacronica  y  123. 


86 


•4 

Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1296  A.D.- 


Irvine,  strong  in  numbers,  as  is  said,  but  greatly 
weakened  by  dissensions.  It  is  not  known  who  was 
in  command  ;  certainly  not  Wallace,  under  whom,  a 
young  squire  of  dubious  renown,  it  would  have  been 
impossible  for  men  of  the  standing  of  the  Bishop  of 
Glasgow,  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  and  Sir  William  de 
Douglas  to  serve.  Sir  Richard  de  Lundin,  disgusted 
with  the  state  of  matters  in  the  Scottish  camp,  went 
over  at  once  to  the  English,  declaring  he  would  not 
fight  for  a  party  that  could  not  agree  among  them¬ 
selves.  The  rest  soon  came  to  terms.  Forsworn  as 
they  were  already,  de  Brus,  the  Steward  and  his 
brother,  Douglas,  and  Lindsay  craved  the  King’s 
peace,  and  set  their  seals  to  the  following  remarka¬ 
ble  confession,  drawn  up  for  them  by  the  equally 
perjured  Bishop  of  Glasgow. 

“  A  tutz  iceaus  qi  ceste  lettre  verrunt  ou  orrunt  :  Robert  de  Brus, 
Counte  de  Carrik,  Jeames  Seneschal  de  Escoce,  Alisaundre  de  Lin- 
descie,  Johan  frerre  le  Seneschal  e  William  de  Douglas,  salutz  en 
J’h’u  Crist.  Comme  chose  seit  a  vous  tutz  :  qe  com  nous  ensemblent 
ove  la  Comune  de  nos  pais  esteioms  levez  encountre  nostre  Seingnur 
mon  Sire  Edward  p  la  grace  de  Dieux  Roys  de  Engleterre  Seingnur 
de  Irelaunde  e  Dux  de  Gwyene,  e  encountre  sa  pees  eioms  en  sa 
seingnurieen  sa  terre  de  Escoce  et  de  Gauweie  fait  arsons,  homecides 
e  divers  roberies  e  .  .  .  estre  fait  p  nous  e  p  les  nos  :  nous  pur 

nous  e  pur  tuz  iceaus  qi  a  nous  furent  adhers  de  la  dite  Comune  a  ceo 
fayre  estre  tenuz  e  sousmis  a  la  volente  nostre  Seingnur  le  Reys 
avauntdit  a  faire  les  amendes  haut  e  bas  a  sa  volente  des  ditz  home¬ 
cides  arsons  e  roberies.  Sauve  a  nous  les  pointz  contenuz  en  un 
escrit  le  quel  nous  avoms  de  mon  Sire  Henri  de  Percy  e  mon  Sire 
Robert  de  Clifforth  Cheventeins  del  ost  au  noble  Rey  de  Engleterre 
es  parties  de  Escoce.  En  temoinaunce  de  queu  chose  a  cest  escrit 
avoms  mis  nos  seaus.  .  .  . 

“  Escrit  a  Irewin  le  noevime  jour  du  mois  de  Juyl  en  le  an  del 
regne  de  Reys  Edward  vintime  quint.” 


1298  a.d.1  The  Campaign  of  Wallace. 


87 


I  have  given  this  important  document  in  the 
original  Norman  French,  as  a  fair  sample  of  a  State 
paper  of  the  period.  Leaving  out  the  formal  exor¬ 
dium  and  conclusion,  the  vital  parts  translate  as 
follows : 

“  .  .  .  Whereas  it  is  a  thing  known  to  you  all  that  we,  with 

the  commons  of  our  lands,  did  rise  in  arms  against  our  Lord  Sir  Ed¬ 
ward,  by  the  grace  of  God  King  of  England,  Lord  of  Ireland,  and 
Duke  of  Guienne,  and  against  his  peace,  within  his  lordship  in  the 
land  of  Scotland  and  Galloway,  have  committed  arsons,  homicides, 
and  various  robberies  .  .  .  we,  on  our  own  behalf  and  on  that  of 

those  of  the  said  Commons  who  were  our  adherents,  make  submission 
to  the  will  of  our  lord  the  King  aforesaid,  to  make  whatsoever 
amends  as  may  be  his  pleasure  for  the  said  homicides,  arsons  and 
robberies  •  saving  always  the  points  reserved  in  a  writing  which  we 
hold  from  Sir  Henry  de  Percy  and  Sir  Robert  de  Clifford,  command¬ 
ers  of  the  host  of  the  noble  the  King  of  England  in  Scotland.  In 
witness  whereof  we  have  placed  our  seals  on  this  writing.'’ 

It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  in 
joining  this  insurrection,  had  any  intention  of  win¬ 
ning  back  the  kingdom  for  de  Balliol.  Probably 
this  was  the  chief  point  on  which  the  Scottish  leaders 
disagreed.  Wallace’s  subsequent  conduct  seems  to 
show  that  his  purpose  was  the  restoration  of  King 
John  ;  though  this  may  have  been  strengthened  by 
the  submission  and  desertion  of  de  Brus  at  Irvine. 
De  Brus’s  own  motives  have  been  brought  pretty 
clearly  to  light  by  the  production  of  a  document 
executed  simultaneously  with  that  quoted  above, 
wherein  the  Bishop  of  Glasgow,  James  the  Steward, 
and  de  Lindsay  bind  themselves  in  surety  for  the 
loyalty  of  the  Earl  of  Carrick  to  King  Edward,  until 
he  should  deliver  his  daughter  Marjorie  as  a  hostage 


88 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1296  A.D.- 


into  the  hands  of  de  Percy  and  de  Clifford.  Such 
serious  precaution  would  scarcely  have  been  taken 
in  the  Earl’s  case,  unless  he  had  been  regarded  as  the 
most  dangerous  conspirator,  pushing  his  own  claim 
to  the  throne. 

Wallace  the  landless  bore  no  share  in  the  submis¬ 
sion  of  Irvine.  Leaving  his  wealthy  colleagues  to 
make  the  best  terms  for  themselves  and  their  posses¬ 
sions  which  they  might  obtain  from  their  Norman 
friends,  he  withdrew  with  all  who  would  follow  him 
into  Selkirk  forest.*  On  July  23d,  Sir  Hugh  de 
Cressingham  wrote  from  Berwick  to  King  Edward, 
informing  him  that  Wallace  was  still  holding  out.f 
Hailes  mentions  Sir  Andrew  de  Moray  of  Bothwell 
as  the  only  baron  who  supported  him  at  this  time ; 
but  this  is  an  error.  In  the  first  place,  the  titular 
lord  of  Bothwell  (for  the  barony  had  been  confiscated 
by  Edward)  was  Sir  William  de  Moray,  an  old  man 
living  in  Lincolnshire  by  order  of  the  king,  in  ex¬ 
treme  poverty,  and  subsisting  on  an  allowance  from 
the  English  Exchequer.  In  the  second  place,  Wal¬ 
lace’s  companion  was  not  the  knight,  Sir  Andrew  de 
Moray,  but  his  son,  an  esquire.  Both  had  been 
taken  prisoners  at  Dunbar  in  1296  ;  Sir  Andrew  was 
still  confined  in  the  Tower,  but  his  son  had  been 
released  from  Chester  Castle,  for  on  August  28,  1297, 
he  received  a  safe-conduct  to  visit  his  father  in  the 
Tower.J  Of  this  he  can  have  made  no  use,  for  he 

*  This  forest  was  at  that  time  reckoned  as  extending  from  Selkirk, 
through  Clydesdale,  to  the  borders  of  Ayrshire. 

f  Bain,  ii. ,  238. 

f  Ibid. ,  177,  246. 


1298  A.D.] 


The  Campaign  of  Wallace. 


89 


was  killed  at  the  battle  of  Stirling  on  September 
nth.  It  is  difficult  to  see  in  this  safe-conduct,  granted 
at  such  a  time,  anything  except  a  ruse  to  get  hold  of 
young  de  Moray,  for  he  was  undoubtedly  most  active 
against  the  English  all  this  summer. 

The  three  Scottish  chiefs  who  had  made  their  sub¬ 
mission  at  Irvine  surrendered  to  their  parole  at 
Berwick.  Nevertheless,  one  of  them,  Sir  William 
de  Douglas,  must  have  failed  to  fulfil  some  of  the 
conditions  exacted  ;  for  on  J uly  24th,  the  constable  of 
Berwick  wrote  to  the  King,  informing  him  that  “  Sir 
William  de  Douglas  is  in  your  castle  of  Berwick  in 
irons,  and  in  safe  keeping,  God  be  thanked,  and  for 
a  sfood  cause,  as  one  who  has  well  deserved  it.  And 
I  pray  you,  if  it  be  your  good  pleasure,  let  him  not 
be  liberated  for  any  profit  nor  influence,  until  you 
know  what  the  matters  amount  to  in  regard  to  him 
personally.”  * 

In  another  letter  he  says  :  “  Sir  William  de  Doug¬ 
las  has  not  kept  the  covenants  he  made  with  Sir 
Henry  de  Percy  ;  he  is  in  your  castle  of  Berwick  in 
my  keeping,  and  he  is  still  very  savage  and  very 
abusive  ( uncore  inout  sanvage  e  moat  araillez).  Sui- 
rey  informed  the  King  that  Douglas  was  imprisoned 
because,  though  he  surrendered  voluntarily,  he  did 
not  produce  his  hostages  on  the  appointed  day  as 
the  others  did.  He  was  taken  to  the  dower  on 
October  12th,  where  he  died  some  time  before  Janu¬ 
ary,  1299^ 

Edward  sailed  on  his  expedition  to  Flanders  in 


*  Stevenson,  ii. ,  205  note. 
f  Bain,  ii.,  269. 


90 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1296  A.D.- 


August,  taking  with  him  many  of  the  Scottish  knights 
captuied  at  Dunbar,  who  were  now  released  on  con¬ 
dition  of  serving  the  King  against  France.  Among 
these  weie  five  of  the  family  of  Comyn,  including 
John  “  the  Red,”  besides  old  Sir  William  de  Moray, 
Sir  Simon  Fraser,  Sir  Richard  de  Siward,  and  the 
Earl  of  Athol.  These  gentlemen  would  be  much 
too  ready  to  exchange  prison  walls  for  active  service, 
to  feel  any  scruples  about  the  justice  of  Edward’s 
quarrel  with  the  King  of  France. 

In  the  north  of  Scotland  the  insurrection  still  went 
on,  keeping  the  Bishop  of  Aberdeen,  the  Earls  of 
Buchan,  Mar,  and  Strathearn,  the  Countess  of  Ross, 
and  others  actively  engaged  in  the  King’s  service. 
The  constable  of  Urquhart  Castle  reported  to  Ed¬ 
ward  on  July  25th  that  young  Andrew  de  Moray 
had  besieged  him  ;  but  that  after  a  night  assault,  in 
which  several  of  the  garrison  were  killed  and  wounded, 
the  besiegeis  had  drawn  off.  While  de  Moray  was 
thus  engaged  in  the  north,  “  with  a  very  great  body 
of  rogues  (inut  grant  hoste  de  felons ),”  as  the  Bishop 
of  Aberdeen  expressed  it  in  his  report  to  Edward, 
Wallace  was  laying  siege  to  Dundee  Castle.  On 
hearing,  however,  that  the  English  army  under  the 
Earl  of  Surrey  was  approaching,  he  drew  off  his 
troops  to  guard  the  fords  and  bridge  of  Forth,  and 
encamped  near  Cambuskenneth  Abbey.  Surrey  had 
been  recalled  on  August  1 8th,  in  order  to  accompany 
the  King  to  Flanders,  and  Sir  Brian  fitz  Alan  ap¬ 
pointed  Governor  of  Scotland  in  his  place.  But 
Sir  Brian  had  raised  a  difficulty  about  his  salary 
(^"1 128  8^),  which  he  declared  was  wholly  insufficient 


1298  A.D.]  The  Campaign  of  Wallace .  91 

for  his  expenses  ;  so,  on  September  7th,  the  Prince 
of  Wales  wrote  on  behalf  of  the  absent  King,  re¬ 
quiring  Surrey  to  remain  at  his  post  until  Scotland 
should  be  at  peace.* 

Surrey  attempted  by  means  of  two  friars  to  come 
to  terms  with  Wallace,  but  without  success,  and  the 
English  prepared  to  attack.  The  Scots  lay  on  and 
about  the  Abbey  Craig,  a  picturesque  and  precipi¬ 
tous  height  on  the  north  bank  of  the  Forth,  which, 
at  the  present  day  is  conspicuous  among  all  neigh¬ 
bouring  hills  by  the  Wallace  Monument,  erected 
thereon  in  1861.  There  was  a  long  wooden  bridge 
across  the  Forth,  the  exact  position  of  which  is  not 
known.  Lord  Hailes,  accepting  the  current  tradi¬ 
tion,  suggests  that  it  was  at  Kildean  Ford,  about  a 
mile  above  the  present  stone  bridges.  But  Wallace’s 
object  would  undoubtedly  be  to  defend  the  bridge, 
which,  if  situated  at  Kildean,  would  have  been  too 
far  from  his  position  on  the  Abbey  Craig  to  enable 
him  to  do  so  effectively.  The  probability  is,  that 
this  bridge  either  stood  very  much  where  the  older 
of  the  existing  stone  bridges  now  stands,  a  position 
affording  ready  communication  between  the  castle 
and  town  of  Stirling  on  the  south  bank,  and  Cam- 
buskenneth  Abbey  on  the  north  bank  ;  or  else  at  a 
ford  lower  down,  where  the  river  runs  nearest  to  the 
Abbey  Craig.  Sir  Richard  de  Lundin  (the  same 
who  left  the  Scottish  army  before  the  submission  of 
Irvine)  vehemently  remonstrated  when  Surrey  or¬ 
dered  his  vanguard  to  cross  the  bridge  in  face  of  the 
enemy,  for  it  was  so  narrow  that  not  more  than  two 


*  Stevenson,  ii.,  230. 


92 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1296  A.D.- 


men-at-arms  could  ride  on  it  abreast.  De  Lundin 
offered  to  show  the  way  over  a  ford,  whereby  the 
Scots  might  be  taken  in  flank  and  rear,  the  main  body 
of  English  meanwhile  keeping  them  engaged  in  front. 
But  his  strategy  was  not  approved,  perhaps  because 
so  recent  a  recruit  had  not  yet  secured  the  confi¬ 
dence  of  the  English  commanders.  De  Cressingham, 
Treasurer  of  Scotland,  led  the  way  across  the  fatal 
bridge,  with  Sir  Marmaduke  de  Twenge  in  command 
of  the  heavy  cavalry.  Progress  was  very  slow  :  it 
was  midday  before  the  English  vanguard  had  formed 
upon  the  north  bank,  and  hitherto  Wallace  had 
made  no  sign.  But  his  time  had  now  come.  Send¬ 
ing  flanking  parties  along  the  river  banks,  he  ad¬ 
vanced  against  the  front  of  the  enemy  and  attacked 
them  with  fury.  Greatly  outnumbered,  de  Cressing- 
ham’s  force  was  thrown  into  confusion  by  this 
sudden  assault,  and  utterly  routed  with  terrible 
slaughter.  Sir  Thomas  Gray,  whose  father,  if  he 
was  not  actually  present  on  that  day,  knew  the 
ground  thoroughly,  and,  as  a  soldier,  would  furnish 
the  chronicler  with  a  trustworthy  account  of  the 
battle,  says  that  Wallace  broke  down  the  bridge 
which  he  had  allowed  the  English  vanguard  to  cross, 
thus  separating  the  enemy  into  two  bodies.  De 
Cressingham,  their  commander,  was  slain,  and,  ac¬ 
cording  to  Hemingburgh,  flayed,  and  his  skin  divided 
among  the  victors — erat  enim  pulcher  et grossus  ninth 
“  for  he  was  comely,  and  too  fat.”  On  the  other 
hand,  the  Scots  suffered  deplorable  loss  in  the  death 
of  young  Andrew  de  Moray. 

The  main  body  of  English,  witnessing  the  disaster 


{From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros.,  Dundee. ) 


1298  A.D.] 


The  Campaign  of  Wallace. 


93 


of  their  comrades,  and  being  unable  to  assist  them, 
straightway  fell  in  a  panic,  set  fire  to  their  end  of 
the  bridge,  and  fled,  leaving  all  their  baggage.  In 
the  whole  history  of  these  wars,  there  is  nothing 
more  difficult  to  understand  than  the  flight  of  the 
English  army  before  Wallace’s  ill-equipped  and  half- 
disciplined  levies,  who  were  greatly  inferior  in  num¬ 
bers,  and  on  the  far  side  of  the  river. 

Of  course,  the  immediate  result  of  this  tremen¬ 
dous  victory — tremendous,  that  is,  as  obtained  by 
raw  levies  over  a  disciplined  and  well-equipped  foice 
— was  that  men  of  all  ranks  flocked  in  to  the  standard 
of  Wallace,  who  was  now  recognised  as  the  national 
champion.  Dundee  Castle,  which  on  his  advance  to 
the  Forth,  Wallace  had  left  beleaguered  by  the  towns¬ 
people,  surrendered  shortly  after  the  battle.  Surrey 
left  the  country  at  the  mercy  of  the  Scots,  and  re¬ 
treated  as  far  as  York,  where  the  barons  of  northern 
England  were  ordered  to  join  him.  Wallace  marched 
after  him,  overrunning  Northumberland  and  Cumber¬ 
land  as  far  as  Newcastle  and  Carlisle,  but  Robert  de 
Balliol  held  the  former  strength  against  him,  and 
Henry  de  Percy  the  latter.  Robert  de  Brus  “  le  viel 
was  still  governor  of  Carlisle  Castle,  but  on  October 
13,  1297,  he  was  directed  to  give  over  his  command 
to  the  Bishop  of  Carlisle*  No  reason  is  assigned 
for  this,  nor  is  there  any  cause  to  suppose  that 
either  he  or  his  son  was  suspected  of  complicity 
with  Wallace  ;  but  affairs  wore  a  threatening  aspect, 
and  it  is  not  improbable  that  need  was  apparent  for 
a  stronger  governor  than  the  elder  de  Brus. 


*  Baiu,  ii.,  244. 


94 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1296  A.D.- 


No  sooner  was  the  Bishop  installed  in  his  com¬ 
mand,  than  the  Scots  invested  Carlisle  for  twenty- 
eight  days  in  November  and  December,  1297.  The 
want  of  discipline  among  Wallace’s  irregular  troops 
was  deplorable,  and  the  people  of  these  counties 
suffered  lamentably  from  their  violence  and  rapac¬ 
ity.'  But  King  Edward  was  on  his  way  home,  and 
a  mighty  army  of  30,000  men  f  was  gathering  to 
avenge  Surrey’s  misfortunes.  Edward  de  Balliol, 
son  of  the  ex-King  John,  was  sent  to  the  Tower 
eaily  in  December.  Wallace  withdrew  across  the 
Border,  and  Surrey  was  at  Roxburgh  again  on  Feb¬ 
ruary  1 6,  1298. 

During  this  campaign  a  protection  was  granted  to 
the  Prior  and  Convent  of  Hexham,  which  is  not  easy 
to  explain.  It  is  given  by  “  Andrew  de  Moray  and 
William  Wallace  (Wallensis),  leaders  of  the  army  of 
Scotland,  in  the  name  of  the  noble  Prince  Lord 
John,  by  the  grace  of  God  illustrious  King  of  Scot¬ 
land,  etc.  Now  Sir  Andrew  de  Moray  was,  as  has 
been  shown,  a  prisoner  in  the  Tower  at  this  time. 
That  his  son  had  been  killed  at  the  battle  of  Stirling, 
is  clearly  certified  in  an  inquisition  post  mortem  held 
on  November  28,  13004  wherein  mention  is  made 
of  his  son,  also  called  Andrew,  two  and  a  half  years 

*  Bain,  ii. ,  245,  249,  261. 

f  Ibid.,  245.  These  figures  may  be  relied  on,  being  taken  from  the 
King’s  order  to  levy.  Hemingburgh,  usually  a  cautious  if  partial 
chronicler,  is  betrayed  into  the  customary  exaggeration  of  his  kind  in 
dealing  with  numbers,  and  states  that  there  were  7,000  cavalry  and 
80,000  infantry.  No  army  of  that  size  has  assembled  in  England 
within  living  memory. 

\  Ibid.,  ii.,  300. 


1298  a.d.]  The  Campaign  of  Wallace. 


95 


of  age,  dwelling  in  Moray,  ut  credunt ,  among  the 
King  of  England’s  enemies.  This  son  was  afterwards 
brother-in-law  of  Robert  I.,  and  Regent  of  Scotland. 
It  is  not,  therefore,  clear  why  Andrew  de  Moray’s 
name  should  have  continued  to  appear  in  Wallace’s 
proclamations.* 

It  seems  to  have  been  about  this  time  that  Wallace 
first  assumed  the  title  of  Governor  of  Scotland  for 
King  John,  though  most  writers  have  given  an  earlier 
date.  It  was  done  with  the  consent  of,  and  probably 
at  the  request  of,  the  representatives  of  the  national 
party, f  who  must  have  felt  the  need  of  an  official 
designation  for  their  leader  ;  and  there  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  that  Wallace  was  perfectly  honest  in  his 
purpose  of  governing  for,  and  ultimately  restoring, 
de  Balliol.  Nevertheless,  Fordun  probably  is  just 
in  attributing  much  of  the  coldness  shown  toward 
Wallace  by  the  Scottish  magnates  to  his  assumption 
of  this  dignity. 

Edward  advanced  into  Scotland,  by  way  of  Ber¬ 
wick,  in  June,  1298.  The  only  important  resistance 
he  encountered  before  reaching  Edinburgh  was  at 
Dirleton,  a  strong  castle,  of  which  the  ruins  may  still 
be  seen  to  the  west  of  North  Berwick.  This  was 
taken,  after  a  stout  resistance,  by  Anthony  Beck,  the 
warlike  Bishop  of  Durham.  The  English  headquar¬ 
ters  were  then  fixed  at  Temple-Liston,  to  the  west 

*  Another  letter  of  this  date  has  been  found  in  the  archives  of 
Lubeck,  issued  in  the  names  of  Andrew  de  Moray  and  William 
Wallace,  giving  trading  facilities  in  Scotland  to  the  cities  of  Lubeck 
and  Hamburg. 

•j-  Anderson’s  Diplomata  Scotice,  No.  44* 


96 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1296  A.D 


of  Edinburgh.  While  waiting  the  arrival  of  the  fleet 
in  the  firth,  a  serious  mutiny  broke  out  among  the 
King’s  Welsh  troops,  caused,  according  to  Heming- 
burgh,  by  wine  served  out  to  them  too  liberally  by 
royal  command.  It  is  stated  by  the  same  authority 
that  eighteen  clerics  were  killed  by  the  mutineers, 
and  that  the  English  cavalry,  in  restoring  order,  slew 
many  of  the  Welshmen,  and  the  remainder  deserted 
in  a  body. 

The  English  army  was  now  in  great  straits  because 
of  delay  in  the  arrival  of  the  fleet  with  stores.  Orders 
had  been  already  prepared,  if  not  actually  issued,  to 
return  to  Berwick,  when  news  came  that  the  Scots 
were  at  Falkirk.  Edward  at  once  determined  to  at¬ 
tack  them,  and  on  July  21st,  his  army  moved  out  to 
a  moor  on  the  east  side  of  Linlithgow  and  bivouacked. 
During  the  night,  the  King,  sleeping  on  the  ground, 
was  trampled  on  by  his  charger,  and,  as  is  said,  two 
of  his  ribs  were  broken.  Notwithstanding  the  pain, 
he  appeared  on  horseback  at  dawn,  and  led  the  ad¬ 
vance. 

The  Scots  were  found  drawn  up  on  rising  and 
broken  ground  close  to  Falkirk.  Hemingburgh  de¬ 
scribes  their  formation  so  minutely  that,  as  Hailes 
observes,  he  must  have  received  his  information  from 
an  eyewitness.  The  pikemen,  which  formed  the  bulk 
of  Wallace  s  army,  were  disposed  in  four  circular 
masses  ( per  turmas  qucituor,  in  modus  circulorum 
rotundorum ),  with  mounted  spearmen  in  the  middle 
of  each  mass.  *  The  intervals  between  these  masses 

*  This  is  the  formation  so  frequently  alluded  to  by  Barbour  and 
Gray  as  the  “  schiltrome.” 


DIRLETON  CASTLE. 

C  From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros.,  Dundee.) 


1298  A.D.]  The  Compaign  of  Wallace. 


97 


were  filled  with  Selkirk  bowmen,*  under  the  com¬ 
mand  of  Sir  John  of  Bonkill,  brother  of  the  Steward. 
The  cavalry  was  formed  on  the  flanks  of  the  line 
of  columns. 

A  peat  moss  lay  in  front  of  the  Scottish  position : 
nevertheless,  Edward  relied  on  his  cavalry  to  dis¬ 
lodge  the  enemy.  De  Bigod,  Earl  Marshal,  led  the 
first  line  of  cavalry  to  the  attack,  and,  finding  the 
morass  impracticable,  made  a  detour  to  the  left. 
The  Bishop  of  Durham,  in  command  of  the  second 
line,  turned  to  the  right,  and  the  two  bodies  charged 
the  Scots  on  both  flanks  simultaneously.  The  pike- 
men  stood  their  ground  stoutly,  but  the  Scottish 
cavalry  left  the  field  in  panic  at  the  first  onset.  Sir 
John  of  Bonkill  fell  mortally  wounded,  and  Heming- 
burgh  testifies  to  the  devotion  of  his  archers,  tall, 
handsome  men,  he  calls  them,  who  perished  round 
their  leader.  Still  the  pikemen  held  out  gallantly, 
but  as  often  as  they  repelled  the  English  horse, 
flights  of  arrows  and  showers  of  sling-stones  poured 
with  fatal  effect  upon  their  densely  serried  ranks. 
At  last,  Macduff  and  Graham  having  fallen,  the  for¬ 
mation  gave  way,  and  terrible  carnage  ensued.  The 
field  of  Falkirk  was  lost  and  won,  and  Surrey  and 
Cressingham  were  avenged. 

It  is  idle  to  speculate  on  the  numbers  of  Scots 


*  At  no  period  of  their  history  did  the  Scots  rely  much  on  their 
archers,  who  were  always  vastly  inferior  to  the  English.  It  is  said 
that,  unlike  the  English,  they  did  not  draw  the  arrow  to  the  right  ear, 
but  discharged  it  from  the  hip.  The  pike  was  ever  the  chosen  weapon 
of  the  Scots,  until  the  introduction  of  gunpowder,  and  indeed  long 
after. 


7 


9§ 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1296  A.D. 


slain.  Walsingham  puts  them  at  the  absurd  figure 
of  60,000,  probably  three  times  more  than  Wal¬ 
lace’s  entire  army.  Hemingburgh  says  56,000,  and 
Buchanan,  writing  long  afterwards  from  a  Scottish 
stand-point,  10,000.  Of  the  losses  on  the  English 
side,  some  certain  information  is  conveyed  by  the 
compensation  paid  by  King  Edward  for  in  horses, 
killed  in  this  action,  the  property  of  his  knights  and 
esquires.*  The  Scottish  chroniclers  attempt  to 
explain  this  great  defeat  by  reason  of  dissensions 
between  Wallace,  Sir  John  of  Bonkill,  and  Comyn ; 
and  the  last  named  knight,  who  is  believed  to  have 
commanded  the  cavalry,  has  been  accused  of  treach¬ 
ery  because  his  squadron  fled.  There  is  not  the 
slightest  ground  for  such  a  charge.  Nothing  is 
known  of  any  disagreement  between  the  Scottish 
leaders;  the  subsequent  disfavour  which  fell  upon 
the  Comyns  would  be  enough  to  prompt  patriotic  his¬ 
torians  to  repeat  any  slander  about  one  of  that  house ; 
but  in  fact  the  excellence  and  numbers  of  the  English 
cavalry,  supported  by  their  famous  archers,  are  quite 
enough  to  account  for  the  defeat  of  the  weaker  army. 

What,  it  may  be  asked,  was  the  Earl  of  Carrick 
about  all  this  time  ?  Hailes  asserts  that  he  joined 
the  national  army  as  soon  as  Edward  crossed  the 
Border.  This  is  founded  on  the  authority  of  Hem¬ 
ingburgh,  who  states  that,  when  Edward  marched 
west  from  Stirling  after  the  battle  of  Falkirk,  Car¬ 
rick  burnt  the  castle  of  Ayr,  which  he  held,  and 
retired.  But  a  very  different  light  is  thrown  upon 
the  attitude  of  the  future  King  of  Scotland  while 


*  Bain,  ii.,  257,  259. 


1298  a.D.3  The  Campaign  of  Wallace . 


99 


these  affairs  were  running  their  course,  by  certain 
letters  lately  published.  One  of  these,  dated  July 
3d,  three  weeks  before  the  battle  of  Falkirk,  is  a 
request  to  King  Edward  by  the  Earl  of  Carrick  for  a 
renewal  of  protection  for  three  knights  who  are  with 
him  on  the  King’s  service  in  Galloway.*  In  another 
document,  he  is  commanded  by  the  King  to  bring 
1000  picked  men  of  Carrick  and  Galloway  to  join  an 
expedition  about  to  be  made  into  Scotland. f  Seeing, 
however,  that  there  is  some  doubt  about  the  exact 
date  of  these  papers,  de  Brus’s  attitude  during  1298 
must  be  considered  uncertain.  The  testimony  of 
Scottish  and  English  chroniclers  is  equally  untrust¬ 
worthy,  for  it  was  the  aim  of  each,  though  with 
different  object,  to  make  it  appear  that  he  attached 
himself  early  to  the  national  cause. 

King  Edward  rested  at  Stirling  till  about  August 
9th ;  by  September  10th  he  had  reached  Carlisle, 
and  on  November  19th,  being  then  at  Newcastle,  he 
appointed  Patrick  de  Dunbar,  Earl  of  March,  his 
captain  of  the  forces  and  castles  in  the  east  of  Scot¬ 
land.  The  war  went  on  in  a  desultory  sort  of  way 
through  the  remainder  of  that  year. 

Cumberland  continued  to  suffer  from  raids  by 
parties  of  Scots,  and  Carlisle  being  blockaded  close¬ 
ly  for  twenty-eight  days  ending  December  8,  1297, 
when  the  approach  of  Edward  from  the  north  caused 
the  invaders  to  move  off.;):  Record  has  been  pre- 

*  Bain,  ii.,  255. 

\  Undated,  but  assigned  by  Bain  (ii.,  268)  to  the  autumn  of  1298, 
though  Stevenson  (ii.,  178)  puts  it  among  the  papers  of  1297. 

X  Raine,  155. 


IOO 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1296-8  A.D. 


served  of  a  grisly  incident  at  this  time,  of  the  sort 
which  accounts,  in  some  measure,  for  Edward’s  repu¬ 
tation  among  the  Scots  for  extraordinary  cruelty. 
Eleven  hostages  had  been  taken  from  Galloway  at 
the  beginning  of  Wallace’s  rising,  as  security  for  the 
loyalty  of  that  province,  which  was  suspected  of 
favouring  the  cause  of  Balliol.  Now  hostages  were 
entitled,  under  the  custom  of  war,  to  lenient  and 
even  hospitable  treatment ;  nevertheless,  these  un¬ 
happy  men,  who  seem  to  have  been  of  respectable 
standing,  were  imprisoned  in  Lochmaben  Castle  by 
the  Earl  of  Surrey  on  October  23,  1297.  On  Sep¬ 
tember  8,  1300,  one  of  them  was  liberated,  Robert 
MacMaster,  the  sole  survivor  of  the  horrors  of  those 
three  years.  * 

*  Raine,  156,  157. 


Sir  John  de  Maxwell. 


Sir  Ingelram  de  Umfravillc. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  DEATH  OF  WALLACE. 

A.D.  1299-1305. 

THE  Earl  of  Carrick  took  a  more  decided  line 
in  1299.  On  August  20th,  Sir  Robert  de 
Hastings  wrote  from  Roxburgh  a  long  letter 
to  King  Edward  of  more  than  common  interest, 
reporting  a  recent  foray  made  by  the  Scots  under 
Sir  Ingelram  de  Umfraville,  Sir  William  de  Balliol, 
and  others,  on  Selkirk  Forest,  then  in  the  keeping 
of  Sir  Simon  Fraser.  Moreover,  there  had  been  a 
meeting  held  between  Bishop  Lamberton  of  St. 
Andrews,  the  Earls  of  Carrick,  Buchan,  and  Men- 
teith,  with  Sir  John  Comyn  “  le  fiz  ”  (the  Red 
Comyn)  and  the  Steward  of  Scotland,  in  order  to 
plan  the  surprise  of  Roxburgh  Castle.  De  Hastings 
had  employed  a  spy  to  gain  intelligence  of  their  move¬ 
ments,  who  described  how  these  barons  fell  out  about 
a  demand  made  by  Sir  David  de  Graham  for  Sir  Wil¬ 
liam  Wallace’s  property,  as  Wallace  was  going  abroad 
without  leave.  Wallace’s  brother,  Sir  Malcolm, 


101 


102 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1299  A.D.' 


objected  to  this,  on  which  Sir  David  and  he  gave 
each  other  the  lie,  and  drew  their  daggers.  Sir  John 
Comyn  seized  the  Earl  of  Carrick  by  the  throat, 
while  his  kinsman,  Buchan,  grappled  with  the 
Bishop  of  St.  Andrews.  However,  no  blood  was  shed, 
and  a  final  agreement  was  come  to  that  the  Bishop, 
the  Earl  of  Carrick,  and  Sir  John  Comyn  should  be 
Guardians  of  the  realm  ;  the  first  named,  as  princi¬ 
pal,  having  custody  of  the  castles.  Carrick  and  Sir 
David  de  Brechin  started  the  same  day  for  Galloway 
and  Annandale,  where  they  attacked  Lochmaben 
Castle,  held  by  Sir  Robert  de  Clifford  for  the  King 
of  England.  Buchan  and  Comyn  left  for  the  High¬ 
lands,  and  the  Steward  and  the  Earl  of  Menteith 
went  to  raise  Clydesdale.  The  Bishop  remained  at 
Stobo,  in  Selkirk  Forest,  of  which  Sir  Robert  de 
Keith  was  appointed  warden,  with  ioo  barbed  horse 
and  1500  foot,  besides  the  forest  bowmen,  to  raid 
the  English  Marches  withal.  De  Umfraville  was 
appointed  sheriff  of  Roxburgh.*  This  fresh  distri¬ 
bution  of  offices,  regarded  in  the  light  of  subsequent 
events,  is  sufficiently  remarkable. 

Little  that  is  definite  is  known  of  Wallace’s  move¬ 
ments  after  his  defeat  at  Falkirk,  but  it  may  be 
readily  believed  that  he  had  lost  some  of  his  ascen¬ 
dency  in  consequence  of  that  event.  At  all  events, 
the  meeting  of  barons  above  described  may  be 
assumed  as  hostile  to  his  influence,  or  deBrus  would 
not  have  been  there.  Wallace  had,  however,  been 
carrying  on  hostilities  in  the  north,  and  made  a  dash 
at  a  convoy  of  supplies  for  Stirling  Castle  on  St. 


*  Bain,  ii.,  525. 


1305  A.D.] 


The  Death  of  Wallace. 


io  3 


Bartholomew’s  DayV  His  journey  abroad,  of  which 
the  prospect  had  so  profoundly  disturbed  the  har¬ 
mony  of  the  conclave  at  Selkirk,  was  undertaken  in 
the  early  summer  of  1299,  with  the  object  of  secur¬ 
ing  the  active  assistance  of  King  Philip  of  France 
and,  what  was  of  even  greater  importance,  the  favour 
of  the  Pope  to  the  Scottish  cause.  In  both  of  these 
objects  he  succeeded  eventually  ;  though  at  first  it 
seemed  as  though  he  had  run  his  head  into  a  noose. 
Philip,  being  at  the  time  anxious  to  gain  Edward’s 
good-will,  put  Wallace  in  prison,  and  wrote  to  inform 
Edward  of  what  he  had  done,  asking  if  he  would 
accept  the  custody  of  the  late  governor  of  Scotland. 
Edward,  as  may  be  supposed,  accepted  the  offer 
eagerly,  for  the  subjugation  of  Scotland  had  come 
to  be  much  nearer  his  heart  than  any  questions  of 
Continental  territory.  But  something  induced  Philip 
to  change  his  mind.  He  not  only  set  Wallace  free, 
but  wrote  a  letter  to  Pope  Boniface  VIII.,  commend¬ 
ing  “  our  beloved  William  de  Walois  knight  of  Scot¬ 
land  ”  to  the  favour  of  his  Holiness. f  The  Pope,  in 
turn,  wrote  to  Edward  on  June  27th,  commanding 
him  to  desist  from  his  attempts  to  conquer  Scotland, 
which  he  claimed  as  the  property  of  the  Holy  See, 
and  to  release  the  Bishop  of  Glasgow  and  other 
ecclesiastics.  ^ 

King  Philip  had  already,  in  the  previous  summer, 
attempted  to  include  the  Scots,  as  his  allies,  in  the 
truce  concluded  with  Edward  at  the  treaty  of  Provins, 


*  Bain,  ii. ,  518. 

\  National  MSS.,  vol.  i.,  p.  lxv. 
|  Feeder  a. 


104 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1299  A.D.- 


which  the  English  King  peremptorily  refused,  on  the 
ground  that  Scotland  was  his  property,  and  that  he 
possessed  the  fealty  of  its  prelates  and  nobles.  But 
any  monarch,  in  those  days  of  ecclesiastical  states¬ 
manship  and  authority,  might  well  hesitate  to  dis¬ 
pute  a  claim  put  forth  by  the  Head  of  the  Church 
of  Rome. 

On  November  13th,  the  three  Guardians,  who 
were  then  besieging  Stirling  Castle,  wrote  to  Ed¬ 
ward,  offering  to  cease  hostilities  on  the  media¬ 
tion  of  the  King  of  France.  Edward  was,  at  the 
moment,  pushing  forward  preparations  for  a  fresh 
expedition  into  Scotland  ;  but  matters  were  not 
going  so  smoothly  between  him  and  his  barons  as 
was  their  wont.  A  muster  of  16,000  men,  ordered 
at  Newcastle  for  the  24th,  was  postponed  by  procla¬ 
mation  till  December  13th;  and  when  that  date 
came,  the  barons  refused  to  advance,  because  of  the 
stormy  weather.  Stirling,  therefore,  had  to  be  left 
to  its  fate.  John  Sampson,  the  constable,  with  his 
garrison  of  90  men,  surrendered  to  Sir  John  de 
Soulis,  after  suffering  severe  privation. 

The  Highlands  and  Islands  were  now  pretty  free 
from  the  English.  Even  in  the  Lowlands,  besides 
Stirling,  the  castles  of  Bothwell*  and  Caerlaverockf 
were  held  for  the  Guardians.  Of  the  last  named 
place,  Sir  John  de  Maxwell  was  the  lord,  who,  if 
Blind  Harry  may  be  believed,  had  entertained  Wal¬ 
lace  there  after  the  capture  of  Tibbers  and  other 
places  in  Nithsdale.  Caerlaverock  stood  perilously 


*  Bain,  ii.,  498. 
f  Ibid. ,  279. 


1305  A.D.] 


The  Death  of  Wallace . 


105 


near  Lochmaben,  where  the  English  had  a  strong 
garrison.  Robert  de  Felton,  the  constable,  wrote  to 
the  King  in  October,  1299,  informing  him  that  Caer- 
laverock  was  the  occasion  of  great  mischief  to  his 
garrison  and  people,  but  that  he  (Felton)  had  scored 
a  success  lately  against  the  enemy,  and  that  at  the 
moment  of  writing  the  head  of  the  Constable  of 
Caerlaverock  adorned  the  great  tower  of  Loch¬ 
maben.  He  added  that  the  people  of  Scotland 
had  been  made  aware  of  the  new  alliance  between 
England  and  France,  and  were  greatly  discouraged 
thereby.  He  implored  the  King  to  turn  his  face 
towards  Scotland,  and  his  enemies  would  disperse. 

Edward  was  not  slow  to  act  on  the  invitation. 
Early  in  1300  he  ordered  large  supplies  to  be  col¬ 
lected  in  England  and  Ireland,  and  forwarded  to 
Berwick  and  Skinburness.  Sixteen  thousand  foot 
were  summoned  to  muster  at  Carlisle,  where  the 
King,  the  young  Prince  of  Wales,  and  the  barons 
joined  the  army  on  June  24th.  The  splendour  and 
perfect  equipment  of  this  host  have  been  minutely 
described  by  a  poet  who  accompanied  the  Court.* 
This  period  was  the  very  noontide  of  chivalry,  and 
the  bard  has  enthusiastically  set  forth  the  names, 
arms,  and  personal  qualities  of  all  the  knights.  Her¬ 
aldry  was  at  that  time  more  than  merely  ornamen¬ 
tal  ;  the  various  arms  served  to  indicate  with  precision 

*  The  Roll  of  Caerlaverock ,  written  in  Norman  French,  is  preserved 
in  the  British  Museum.  Sir  Harris  Nicolas,  who  first  edited  it  for 
publication  in  1828,  attributed  it  to  Walter  of  Exeter,  a  monk.  But 
there  seems  no  reason  to  ascribe  the  poem  to  him  rather  than  to  any¬ 
one  else. 


io6 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1299  A.D.- 


the  different  knights  in  the  field  just  as  in  modern 
armies  different  corps  are  distinguished  by  their 
uniforms.  The  chivalrous  science  had  not  been 
degraded,  as  it  subsequently  came  to  be,  to  minister 
to  the  genealogical  pride  of  great  seigneurs.  The 
charges  on  the  shields  were  kept  distinct  and  bril¬ 
liantly  coloured,  so  that  they  might  be  recognised 
easily  on  parade  and  in  battle. 

Early  in  July,  King  Edward  advanced  from  Car¬ 
lisle  to  lay  siege  to  Maxwell’s  castle  of  Caerlaverock 
with  3000  men.  “  The  blaze  of  gold  and  silver,” 
says  the  poet,  and  the  radiance  of  rich  colours, 
displayed  by  the  embattled  host,  illuminated  the 
valley  which  they  occupied.  .  .  .  Those  of  the 
castle,  seeing  us  arrive,  might,  as  I  well  believe, 
deem  that  they  were  in  greater  peril  than  they  could 
remember  ever  before.  .  .  .  The  English  knights 
were  habited,  not  in  coats  and  surcoats,  but  were 
mounted  on  costly  and  powerful  chargers  and  were 
well  and  securely  armed  against  surprise.  There 
were  many  rich  caparisons  embroidered  on  silks  and 
satins:  many  a  beautiful  pennon  fixed  to  the  lances 
and  many  a  banner  displayed.  .  .  .  The  days 
were  long  and  fine  :  they  proceeded  by  easy  jour¬ 
neys,  arranged  in  four  squadrons.” 

To  resist  this  imposing  array  Caerlaverock  con¬ 
tained  but  sixty  men  in  garrison ;  but  they  made  a 
gallant  defence.  The  castle  was  invested  on  July 
10th,  and  the  English  at  once  went  forward  to  the 
assault.  The  defenders  kept  up  such  a  constant 
volley  of  great  stones  upon  the  escalading  parties 
that  the  gay  coats  of  many  English  knights  were 


CAERLAVEROCK  CASTLE. 

C From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros. ,  Dundee .) 


J305  A.D.] 


The  Death  of  Wallace. 


107 


spoilt,  and  some  were  killed.  But  King  Edward 
had  brought  with  him  a  strong  siege  train.  Batter¬ 
ing-rams  of  the  newest  design,  and  robinets  and 
catapults  throwing  huge  stones  made  such  havoc  of 
the  defences  that  at  the  end  of  the  second  day  a 
white  flag  was  displayed  from  the  gate  tower  in 
token  of  surrender.  An  English  arrow,  as  is  said, 
pierced  the  hand  of  him  who  held  it,  pinning  it  to 
his  face.  When  the  garrison  marched  out,  the 
besiegers  were  astonished  to  find  how  few  men 
composed  it. 

Of  the  gallant  sixty,  many,  says  the  chronicler  of 
Lanercost,  were  hanged  on  the  trees  near  the  castle 
as  rebels,  by  order  of  the  King.  The  author  of  the 
Siege  of  Caerlaverock ,  however,  states  that  their 
lives  were  spared  by  the  King’s  clemency. 

From  Caerlaverock  the  English  advanced  into 
eastern  Galloway,  where,  although  it  was  the  pecul¬ 
iar  territory  of  the  Balliols,  Edward  had  some  reason 
to  expect  support,  for  the  Celtic  chiefs  of  that  prov¬ 
ince  had  never  ceased  to  resent  its  partition,  under 
feudal  law,  among  the  three  daughters  of  Alan,  their 
last  lord.  Besides,  in  1296,  when  Balliol  first  re¬ 
volted,  Edward  had  conciliated  the  people  of  Gallo¬ 
way  by  releasing  from  the  prison  where  he  had  lain 
for  more  than  fifty  years,  Thomas,  the  natural  son  of 
Alan,  whom  they  had  desired  to  make  their  lord. 
He  had,  at  the  same  time,  restored  by  proclamation 
all  their  ancient  liberties  and  customs,  and,  at  the 
request  of  the  said  Thomas,  promised  a  revision 
of  rents  and  other  favours.  In  effect,  King  Edward 
met  with  no  resistance  in  Galloway,  and  his  accounts 


io8 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1299  A.D.- 


show  that  he  was  scrupulous  to  pay  for  all  supplies 
delivered  for  the  use  of  his  army. 

But  there  remained  a  more  potent  influence  for 
him  to  conciliate  than  the  chiefs  of  the  south-west. 
Pope  Boniface’s  claim  to  the  kingdom  of  Scotland 
had  been  delivered  to  him  during  the  siege  of  Caer- 
laverock.  It  cannot  have  been  agreeable  reading 
for  the  proud  King,  but  even  the  most  puissant 
monarch  of  Europe  had  to  weigh  his  thoughts  well 
before  incurring  the  frown  of  the  Vice-gerent  of 
God.  So  Edward  began  by  releasing  Wishart, 
Bishop  of  Glasgow,  who  thereupon  took  the  oath 
of  fealty  to  the  King  of  England  for  the  fourth 
time,  swearing  on  the  consecrated  host,  the  gospels, 
the  cross  of  St.  Neot,  and  the  Black  Rood  of  Scot¬ 
land.  Nothing  is  more  remarkable  in  the  political 
history  of  this  period  than  the  freedom  with  which 
great  men  perjured  themselves,  except,  indeed,  the 
value  which  men  continued  to  attach  to  the  security 
of  an  oath. 

On  October  30th,  at  the  instance  of  the  King  of 
France,  a  truce  was  concluded  at  Dumfries,  to  en¬ 
dure  between  England  and  Scotland  till  the  following 
Pentecost.  This  truce  Philip  exerted  himself  to  get 
prolonged,  but  in  vain. 

England  was  in  no  mood  at  the  moment  to  brook 
further  foreign  interference,  for  Edward  and  his 
Parliament  were  busy  at  Lincoln  drawing  up  a 
spirited  reply  to  the  Pope’s  claim  to  Scotland  as  a 
fief  of  the  See  of  Rome.  In  matters  spiritual,  Eng¬ 
land,  her  King  and  people,  were  the  dutiful  servants 
of  Holy  Church ;  but  in  temporal  affairs — “  Hands 


1305  A.D.] 


The  Death  of  Wallace . 


109 


off !  ”  The  answer  went  back,  ratified  by  a  hundred 
seals  of  English  earls,  barons,  and  knights.  Volu¬ 
minous  arguments,  drawn  from  sources  so  remote  as 
Brutus  the  Trojan,  were  addressed  to  his  Holiness, 
to  prove  the  inalienable  right  of  the  Kings  of  Eng¬ 
land  in  the  Scottish  sovereignty.  The  Pope  was 
informed  that  he  had  been  deceived  by  certain 
“  enemies  of  peace  and  sons  of  rebellion,  then  resi¬ 
dent  at  his  Court,”  wherein  the  reference  to  Wallace 
and  his  companions  is  not  obscure.  The  letter  con¬ 
cluded  that  “  upon  a  due  consideration  and  treating 
of  the  contents  of  your  memorable  letter,  the  com¬ 
mon  and  unanimous  consent  of  all  and  singular  was, 
is,  and  will  be,  God  willing,  for  ever :  that  our  lord 
the  King  ought  not  to  answer  judicially  before  you, 
nor  submit  his  rights  over  the  realm  of  Scotland,  nor 
any  other  of  his  temporal  rights  whatsoever,  to  your 
doubtful  judgment.”  Whatever  opinion  may  be  held 
of  the  justice  of  Edward’s  claim  over  Scotland,  it 
must  be  admitted  that  he,  entertaining  no  doubts 
on  the  matter,  played  a  noble  part  in  its  de¬ 
fence,  and  never  did  the  English  Parliament  act 
with  greater  courage  and  dignity  than  they  did 
in  supporting  their  monarch  through  this  con¬ 
troversy. 

Preparations  for  resuming  the  war  on  the  expiry 
of  the  truce  were  pushed  on  with  energy.  King 
Edward  himself  took  command  of  12,000  men  at 
Berwick,  assigning  to  the  Prince  of  Wales,  then  six¬ 
teen  years  old,  the  chance  of  winning  his  spurs  with 
another  army  mustered  at  Carlisle. 

Neither  force  encountered  much  fighting.  Except 


X  IO 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1299  A  D.' 


the  capture  of  Bothwell  Castle,  the  King  had  no 
prize  to  show  when  he  went  into  winter  quarters  at 
Linlithgow  in  the  autumn  of  1301  ;  while  the  Prince, 
after  traversing  Galloway  without  resistance,  found 
his  flank  threatened  by  a  force  in  the  hills  about 
Loch  Dee,  and  persevered  no  further. 

All  this  time  the  Earl  of  Carrick  continued  to  act 
a  double  part.  He  was  still,  in  name,  one  of  the 
Guardians  of  Scotland,  and,  as  such,  was  bound  to 
hostility  with  England.  Nevertheless,  on  February 
16,  1302,  King  Edward,  being  then  at  Roxburgh, 
granted,  at  the  instance  of  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  par¬ 
don  to  one  Hector  Askeloc  for  the  slaughter  of 
Cuthbert  of  Galloway  ;  *  and  before  the  end  of  April 
following,  the  Earl  and  his  Carrick  tenants  had  been 
received  to  the  King’s  peace. f  Simultaneously,  on 
April  6th,  King  Philip  was  writing  a  letter  to  the 
Earl  of  Carrick  and  John  Comyn,  “Guardians  of 
Scotland  in  the  name  of  King  John,”  to  say  that  he 
had  received  their  envoys,  the  Abbot  of  Jedburgh 
and  Sir  John  Wishart,  and  fully  understood  the  let¬ 
ters  and  messages ;  that  he  was  moved  to  his  very 
marrow  by  the  evils  brought  on  their  country, 
praised  them  for  their  constancy  to  their  King 
(John),  and  urged  them  to  persevere.  As  for  the 
assistance  they  asked  for,  he  was  carefully  consider¬ 
ing  how  he  could  help  them,  but,  bearing  in  mind 
the  dangers  of  the  road,  he  had  given  his  mind  to 
the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews  (Lamberton),  for  whom 
he  desired  full  credence.  Philip’s  precaution  was 


*  Bain,  ii.,  328. 
\  Ibid.,  331. 


1305  A.D.] 


The  Death  of  Wallace . 


1 1 1 


not  superfluous.  This  letter*  fell  into  the  hands  of 
King  Edward,  though  perhaps  not  till  the  bishop 
was  taken  some  years  afterwards.  Later  in  the 
same  year  the  Earl  of  Carrick  attended  Edward  s 
Parliament  held  in  October. f  The  fact  is,  it  be¬ 
hoved  him  to  have  a  keen  eye  to  his  own  interests 
at  this  time.  His  father,  the  old  Lord  of  Annan- 
dale,  was  approaching  his  end,  and  the  son’s  rights 
as  heir  to  the  valuable  English  estates  were  in 
jeopardy. 

Edward  was  now  straitened  for  means  to  pay  his 
troops.  A  serious  mutiny  broke  out  at  Berwick  in 
the  autumn  of  1301,  because  of  arrears  of  pay;:): 
the  commanders  of  other  garrisons  were  clamour¬ 
ing  for  money  ;  §  so  on  January  26,  1302?  another 
truce  was  brought  about  by  French  intervention,  to 
endure  till  St.  Andrew’s  Day,  November  30th.  Five 
days  before  the  expiry  of  this  truce,  that  between 
England  and  France  was  extended  till  Easter,  1302; 
but  King  Edward  would  not  yield  to  Philip’s  desire 
that  the  Scots  should  be  included  in  it. 

In  the  summer  of  1302  the  national  party  received 
an  important  recruit  in  the  person  of  Sir  Simon 
Fraser,  hitherto  a  trusted  official  in  the  English 
service,  who  had  served  in  the  Earl  of  March  s 
company  at  the  siege  of  Caerlaverock.  He  de¬ 
serted  from  Wark  Castle,  and  carried  off  the  armoui 
and  horses  of  his  comrade  Sir  William  de  Dunolm.  | 
He  joined  Comyn  the  Guardian,  and  the  first  we 
hear  of  him  under  his  new  colours  is  at  the  battle  of 


*  Bain,  ii.,  330. 
§  Ibid.,  314- 


f  Ibid.,  343- 


\  Ibid.,  310. 
1  Ibid. ,  334. 


I  I  2 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1299  A.D.' 


Roslyn,  February  24,  1303,  where  Comyn  and  he 
defeated  Sir  John  de  Segrave.  Comyn  and  the 
Bishop  of  St.  Andrews  were  now  acting  alone  as 
Guardians  of  Scotland.  Bruce  appears  to  have  de¬ 
cided  at  last  to  join  his  fortunes  to  the  English,  for 
among  those  summoned  to  meet  Edward  at  Rox¬ 
burgh  on  May  12,  1303,  was  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  with 
all  the  men-at-arms  he  could  muster  and  1000  foot 
from  Carrick  and  Galloway.  *  On  July  14th  he  re¬ 
ceived  an  advance  of  pay  from  the  King,  f  being  at 
the  time  Edward’s  sheriff  of  Lanark  £  and  governor 
of  Ayr  Castle.  § 

Enormous  expense  on  men  and  material  was  in¬ 
curred  for  this  season’s  campaign.  Two  fortified 
wooden  bridges,  for  the  passage  of  the  Forth,  were 
brought  from  Lynn-Regis  under  escort  of  thirty  ves¬ 
sels,  ||  besides  siege  engines  in  great  number  and 
variety.  The  Scots  were  well-nigh  overpowered. 
Brechin  Castle  fell  about  the  beginning  of  August ; 
Stirling  remained  the  only  place  of  strength  still 
holding  out. 

O11  February  9,  1304,  Comyn  and  his  friends 
surrendered  on  terms  at  Strathord.  These  terms 
cannot,  under  the  circumstances,  be  considered  illib¬ 
eral,  for,  with  certain  exceptions,  the  offenders  were 
not  to  suffer  in  life  or  limb,  by  imprisonment  or  dis¬ 
inheritance.  Among  those  thus  leniently  dealt  with 
were  Sir  Edmund  Comyn  of  Kilbride,  Sir  John  de 
Graham,  Sir  John  de  Vaux,  Sir  Godfrey  de  Roos, 
Sir  John  de  Maxwell,  and  Sir  Pierre  de  Prendergast. 

f  Ibid.,  355.  f  Ibid.,  372. 

(j  Ibid.,  352. 


*  Bain ,  348. 
§  Ibid.,  377. 


1305  a.d.]  The  Death  of  Wallace .  1 13 

The  incorrigible  Bishop  of  Glasgow,  John  Corny n, 
de  Soulis,  James  the  Steward,  Sir  Simon  Fraser,  and 
Thomas  du  Bois  were  sentenced  to  various  terms  of 
exile,  from  one  to  three  years,  but  these  periods  were 
afterwards  shortened  on  condition  that  the  culprits 
should  regain  the  King’s  favour  by  exerting  them¬ 
selves  to  capture  Wallace,  who  was  beyond  the  pale 
of  mercy.  *  There  was  something  manifestly  un¬ 
just  in  the  decree  that  treated  thus  lightly  the  of¬ 
fences  of  trebly  forsworn  subjects,  and  dealt  so 
harshly  with  one  who  had  never  done  fealty  to 
Edward.  The  English  King  was  every  inch  a  sol¬ 
dier  ;  it  had  been  better  for  his  renown  to  extend 
some  of  his  sympathy  to  the  most  valiant  of  his  foes. 
But  he  was  far  from  doing  so.  On  March  2,  1304, 
he  wrote  an  impatient  letter  to  the  Earl  of  March 
reproaching  him  with  slackness  in  proceeding  against 
Wallace.  “  We  are  much  astonished,”  he  said,  “  why 
you  act  so  leisurely,  unless  it  be  to  fulfil  the  proverb 


Quant  la  guerre  fu  fine'e 
Si  trest  Audegier  sespee. 

(when  the  war  was  finished  then  Audegier  drew  his 
sword).”  Next  day,  strict  orders  were  issued  to  Sir 
Alexander  of  Abernethy,  who  was  in  pursuit  of 
Wallace  in  the  parts  about  Menteith,  that  on  no 
account  were  any  terms  to  be  offered  to  him  and 
his  followers,  except  unconditional  surrender,  f  It 
is  not  pleasant  to  read  another  letter  written  by  the 


*  Palgrave,  ii. ,  p,  cxxxvii.,  et  seq. 

f  Stevenson,  ii.,  471. 

8  ^ 


1*4 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1299  A.D.' 


King  on  the  same  day  to  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  ap¬ 
plauding  his  diligence  in  hunting  the  patriot,  and 
urging  him  earnestly  “  as  the  cloak  is  well  made,  so 
also  to  make  the  hood.”  * 

Edward  held  a  Parliament  at  St.  Andrews  in  mid- 
Lent,  1304,  where  the  Earl  of  Carrick  and  the 
Bishop  of  Glasgow  attended,  after  which  the  siege 
of  Stirling  was  begun  in  earnest.  The  King  wrote 
to  the  Prince  of  Wales,  directing  him  to  strip  lead 
from  all  the  churches  near  Perth  and  Dunblane, 
taking  care  not  to  uncover  the  roofs  over  the  altars,  f 
It  is  no  more  than  fair  to  add  that  the  war  material 
thus  appropriated  was  scrupulously  paid  for  at  a 
subsequent  date. 

Robert  de  Brus  “  le  viel,”  Lord  of  Annandale,  died 
about  this  time,  and  the  Earl  of  Carrick  went  to 
London  and  Essex  to  look  after  his  succession  and 
collect  his  rents.  Of  the  latter,  he  wrote  to  the 
King  at  the  beginning  of  April  to  say  that  he  had 
not  succeeded  in  getting  a  penny.  But  besides  his 
private  affairs,  de  Brus,  from  prudential  motives,  was 
diligent  in  the  King’s  service — none  more  so  ;  and 
on  April  16th  Edward  wrote  thanking  him  for  sending 
siege  engines  to  Stirling.  On  May  1st  orders  were 
issued  from  Stirling  for  inquisitions  on  the  Earl’s 
lands  in  Essex,  Huntingdon,  and  Middlesex,;);  after 
which,  on  June  14th,  de  Brus,  having  done  homage 

*  Bain,  ii. ,  383. 

f  Stevenson,  ii.,  481. 

\  Bain,  ii.,  400.  There  is  a  warning  in  these  inquisitions  against 
too  implicit  reliance  on  early  documents.  Bruce’s  age  is  vari¬ 
ously  stated  therein  at  22,  28,  and  30  years.  He  was,  in  fact,  just 
under  28. 


1305  A.D.]  The  Death  of  Wallace.  i  15 

and  fealty,  was  served  heir,  and  three  days  later  his 
debts  to  the  King  were  respited.  It  would  be  idle 
to  refuse  to  see,  in  Bruce’s  dutiful  attitude  to 
King  Edward,  the  anxiety  of  the  heir  to  secure  his 
rich  inheritance.  So  hardly  shall  they  that  have 
riches  - ! 

The  storm,  long  gathering,  at  length  burst  on  Sir 
William  de  Oliphant  and  the  gallant  defenders  of 
Stirling  Castle.  High  on  their  precipitous  rock  they 
had  watched  the  vast  preparations  for  their  destruc¬ 
tion  ;  and  now  thirteen  great  engines,  the  very  latest 
inventions  of  military  science,  hurled  missiles  against 
the  walls  and  wildfire  into  the  castle.  These  ma¬ 
chines  all  bore  names,  registered  as  precisely  as  those 
of  modern  battle-ships.  There  were  the  Lincoln 
and  the  Segrave,  the  Robinet  and  the  Kingston,  the 
Vicar  and  the  Parson,  the  Berefrey,  the  Linlithgow, 
the  Bothwell,  the  Prince’s,  the  Gloucester,  the  Dove- 
dale,  and  the  Tout-le-monde,  besides  a  mighty  “  war- 
wolf,”  the  like  of  which  had  never  been  seen.*  An 
oriel  window  was  built  in  the  King’s  house  in  the 
town,  in  order  that  the  Queen  and  her  ladies  might 
watch  the  progress  of  the  siege. f  Outside,  in  the 
town,  it  was  a. pleasant  picnic  in  the  summer  weather, 
but  within  the  fortress  provender  soon  began  to  run 
low;  yet  no  sign  of  surrender  was  made  till  July. 
On  the  20th  of  that  month  Oliphant  submitted  un¬ 
conditionally,  but  Edward  would  not  allow  any  of  his 
troops  to  enter  the  castle  till  he  had  tried  on  it  the 
effect  of  his  war-wolf  ( tauntqz  il  eit  ferru  ove  le  Lup 


*  Bain,  ii.,  420. 
f  W irdrobe  Accounts. 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1299  A.D.- 


1 1 6 


de  guerre').  The  garrison  were  warned  to  seek  what 
shelter  they  could  before  the  shot  was  fired. 

Oliphant  and  his  men  were  afterwards  made  to  go 
through  a  humiliating  mummery  of  contrition  for  the 
benefit  of  the  ladies,  with  pretended  tears  ( tremulos 
et  quasi  cum  lacrymis ),  and  then  were  shipped  off  to 
various  castles  in  England  as  prisoners  of  war.  Oli¬ 
phant  remained  a  prisoner  till  1308,  when  he  was 
released  on  giving  security  for  good  behaviour, 
and  there  is  reason  to  believe  he  then  entered  the 
English  service. 

The  earliest  mention  of  Edward  de  Brus,  the  Earl 
of  Carrick’s  brother,  occurs  in  this  campaign.  His 
name  appears  in  the  roll  of  the  Prince  of  Wales’s 
army  on  April  6,  1304.  It  is  not  clear  who  “  Mon¬ 
sieur  Guillem  de  Breouse  ”  was,  whose  name  is  in¬ 
cluded  in  the  list  of  English  nobility  present  with 
King  Edward  at  the  siege  of  Stirling,*  but  probably 
he  belonged  to  one  of  the  collateral  branches  of  the 
family  in  the  south. 

All  the  fortresses  of  Scotland  were  now  in  English 
hands,  but  there  was  no  security  as  long  as  Wallace 
remained  at  liberty.  Extraordinary  efforts,  there¬ 
fore,  were  made  to  capture  him.  The  sentences  of 
exile  on  John  Comyn,  de  Lindsay,  Graham,  and 
Simon  Fraser  were  remitted,  on  condition  that, 
among  them,  they  should  take  Wallace  before  De¬ 
cember  20th  ;  James  the  Steward,  de  Soulis,  and  de 
Umfraville  were  warned  not  to  come  within  the 
King’s  power  until  that  should  be  accomplished. 


*  Palgrave,  274. 


1305  a.d.]  The  Death  of  Wallace .  1 1 7 

At  last,  in  the  summer  of  1305,  Sir  William  Wal¬ 
lace* * * §  fell  into  the  hands  of  his  enemies.  Popular 
tradition  has  covered  with  infamy  the  memory  of 
Sir  John  de  Menteith,  his  friend,  for  having  betrayed 
him  ;  but  Sir  John  had  been  since  March  20,  1304, 
governor  of  the  castle  and  sheriffdom  of  Dunbartoiy  f 
and  there  is  no  evidence  to  connect  him  with  the 
treachery.  If  treachery  there  was,  as  is  far  from  un¬ 
likely,  the  real  traitor  was  probably  one  Rawe  Raa 
(Ralf  Ray),  in  whose  house  in  Glasgow,  according  to  a 
paper  in  the  Arundel  collection,  Wallace  was  taken. 
This  Rawe  or  Ralf  may  be  identified  with  Ralf  de 
Haliburton,  taken  prisoner  at  Stirling,  and  released  on 
condition  of  securing  Wallace,  J  The  same  indi¬ 
vidual  is  probably  referred  to  as  “  le  vallet  qui  espia 
Will  de  Waleys,”  and  received  a  reward  of  forty 
marks.  §  One  hundred  marks  were  divided  among 
others  who  took  part  in  the  capture,  and  Menteith, 
to  whose  custody  as  governor  of  the  district  he  would 
be  committed,  received  £i$i.  It  is  quite  possible 
that  Menteith  had  been,  and  perhaps  remained,  a 
personal  friend  of  Wallace;  a  fact  quite  sufficient  to 
attract  popular  odium  to  his  name,  although  in  re¬ 
ceiving  the  prisoner  and  delivering  him  up  to  justice 


*It  is  not  known  when,  or  at  whose  hands,  Wallace  received 
knighthood,  but  he  is  commonly  referred  to  as  “  Sir  William”  in 
contemporary  documents.  In  his  indictment  at  Westminster,  how¬ 
ever,  he  is  termed  simply  “  Willelmus  le  Waleys,”  i.  e .,  William  the 
Welshman. 

f  Bain,  ii.,  384. 

X  Ibid.,  448.  His  name  appears  erased  in  the  list  of  prisoners. 

§  Palgrave,  295. 


1 18 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1299  A.D. 


he  was  doing  no  more  than  his  plain  duty  as  King 
Edward’s  officer. 

The  trial,  for  which  the  commission  was  issued  on 
August  1 8th,  was  hurried  through  with  indecent 
haste.  The  prisoner  arrived  in  London  on  August 
22,  1305,  and  was  lodged  in  the  house  of  one  William 
de  Leyre,  in  Fenchurch  parish.  Next  day  he  was 
taken  on  horseback  to  Westminster,  accompanied 
by  the  mayor,  sheriffs,  aldermen,  and  others,  and 
brought  before  his  judges  in  the  great  hall.  There 
he  was  set  on  the  south  bench,  crowned  with  laurel 
in  mockery,  “  forasmuch  as  it  was  commonly  re¬ 
ported  that  he  had  said  in  times  past  that  he  ought 
to  wear  a  crown  in  that  hall.”  *  On  being  arraigned 
as  a  traitor  by  Sir  Peter  Malory,  the  King’s  Justici¬ 
ary,  he  protested  that  he  was  no  traitor  to  the  King 
of  England,  in  that  he  had  never  sworn  fealty  to 
him.  True  as  this  plea  undoubtedly  was,  it  could 
hardly  be  considered  relevant  by  those  who  ad¬ 
mitted  and  supported  Edward’s  claim  as  rightful  King 
of  Scotland  by  conquest ;  inasmuch  as  Wallace,  they 
argued,  was  none  the  less  a  rebel  because,  being  a 
Scotchman,  he  had  refused  to  swear  fealty.  He  was, 
therefore,  convicted  of  treason,  as  well  as  sacrilege, 
homicide,  robbery,  and  arson,  and  sentenced  to  be 
drawn  from  Westminster  to  the  Tower,  from  the 
Tower  to  Aldgate,  and  so  to  Smithfield,  where  he 
should  be  hanged.  All  this  was  carried  out  on  the 
same  day.  As  a  homicide  and  robber  he  was 
hanged ;  as  an  outlaw  he  was  beheaded  ;  for  his 
“  enormous  villany,  done  to  God  and  Holy  Church 


*  Stow’s  Chronicle. 


1305  A. D.]  The  Death  of  Wallace .  1 19 

in  burning  churches  and  vessels  containing  the  body 
of  Christ  and  relics  of  the  saints,”  his  entrails  were 
taken  out  and  burnt ;  as  a  traitor,  his  head  was  fixed 
on  London  Bridge,  and  his  quarters  suspended  on 
gibbets  at  Newcastle-on-Tyne,  Berwick,  Stirling,  and 
Perth.  For  it  was  held  by  mediaeval  statesmen  that 
the  majesty  of  the  law  could  not  be  defended  by 
simple  death ;  multiple  and  carefully  classified  in¬ 
dignity  was  decreed  in  this  world  to  every  mortal 
organ  of  the  offender,  while  ecclesiastics  might  be 
trusted  to  chase  the  spirit  into  everlasting  torments 
in  the  next. 

Authentic  particulars  relating  to  Wallace’s  brief 
career  are  so  exceedingly  scanty,  that  the  inventory 
of  papers  found  with  him  when  he  was  taken  as¬ 
sumes  an  interest  it  might  not  otherwise  possess, 
especially  as  the  papers  themselves  have  not  been 
preserved.  They  consisted  of  letters  of  safe-con¬ 
duct  from  King  Haco  of  Norway,  King  Philip  of 
France,  and  John  de  Balliol,  with  the  confederations 
and  ordinances  made  between  Wallace  and  the  mag¬ 
nates  of  Scotland. 


The  Earl  of  Gloucester. 


Sir  Roger  de  Kirkpatrick. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  REVOLT  OF  ROBERT  DE  BRUS. 

A.D.  1304-1306. 

IT  is  now  necessary  to  revert  to  the  summer  of 
1304,  when  King  Edward  was  besieging  Stir¬ 
ling  Castle. 

On  June  nth,  at  the  very  time  when  the  Earl  of 
Carrick  was  receiving  the  King’s  thanks  for  his  ser¬ 
vices,  doing  fealty  for  his  heritage,  and  having  his 
debts  remitted,  he  was  in  conference  at  Cambus- 
kenneth  Abbey  with  William  de  Lamberton,  Bishop 
of  St.  Andrews.  A  secret  bond  was  concluded  be¬ 
tween  them,  whereby  it  was  agreed,  “  in  view  of 
future  dangers,”  that  they  should  in  all  time  coming 
assist  each  other  against  all  persons  whatsoever; 
that  neither  should  undertake  any  business  without 
consulting  the  other,  and  that  each  should  warn  the 
other  of  any  approaching  danger.* 

This  agreement  with  de  Lamberton  had  such  far- 
reaching  consequences,  that  this  is  a  convenient 


*  Palgrave,  323. 


1304-6  a.d.i  The  Revolt  of  Robert  de  Brus . 


I  2  I 


moment  to  tabulate  the  public  acts  of  Robert  de 
Brus  up  to  the  time  of  Wallace’s  execution.  In  the 
cold  light  of  official  records  and  correspondence, 
they  present  an  appearance  somewhat  different 
from  that  given  to  them  in  what  has  often  passed 
for  history. 

1296.  August  28  :  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  22  years  of  age,  does  fealty 
to  Edward  I.  at  Berwick,  his  father,  the  Lord  of  Annandale, 
being  the  King’s  governor  of  Carlisle. 

1297.  Renews  his  fealty  at  Carlisle  and  raids  the  lands  of  Douglas. 
Afterwards  joins  the  insurgent  Scots,  but  capitulates  at  Irvine, 
July  9,  giving  his  daughter  Marjorie  as  hostage  for  his  loyalty 
to  Edward.  On  November  14  he  is  received  to  the  King’s 
peace. 

1298.  July  3  :  being  in  the  King’s  service  in  Galloway,  he  writes  to 
the  English  chancellor. 

1299.  Is  elected  one  of  three  Guardians  of  Scotland  in  the  name  of 
King  John.  Attacks  Edward’s  garrison  in  Lochmaben  Castle 
in  the  same  month. 

November  13  :  he  and  the  other  Guardians,  besieging  Stirling 
Castle,  write  to  King  Edward,  offering  to  desist  from  hostili¬ 
ties  on  the  mediation  of  the  King  of  France. 

1302.  February  6  :  King  Edward  pardons  a  murderer  on  the  inter¬ 
cession  of  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  who  is,  at  the  same  time, 
appealing  for  aid  to  the  King  of  France. 

April  28  :  comes  with  his  tenants  into  the  King’s  peace. 
October :  attends  King  Edward’s  Parliament. 

1303.  April :  receives  orders  from  the  King  to  attend  muster  at 
Roxburgh,  with  forces  from  Galloway. 

July  14  :  receives  advance  of  pay  from  King  Edward. 
December  :  has  been  appointed  King  Edward’s  sheriff  of 
Lanark. 

1304.  January  :  is  King  Edward’s  constable  of  Ayr  Castle. 

March  3  :  receives  King  Edward’s  thanks  for  good  service. 
Attends  the  King’s  Parliament  at  St.  Andrews. 

April  :  his  father  being  dead,  he  goes  to  London  to  look 
after  his  succession  and  corresponds  with  the  King.  On  the 


122 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1304  A.D.- 


13th  he  receives  King  Edward’s  thanks  for  forwarding  engines 
for  the  siege  of  Stirling. 

June  11  :  concludes  secret  treaty  with  the  Bishop  of  St. 
Andrews  against  all  men  ;  is  served  heir  to  English  estates 
on  the  14th,  does  homage  for  the  same  on  the  17th,  and  his 
debts  to  the  King  are  respited. 

1305.  March  20 :  is  with  King  Edward  at  Westminster  ;  petitions 
the  King  to  give  him  de  Umfraville’s  lands  in  Carrick,  which 
is  granted. 

Attends  Edward’s  Parliament  in  Lent. 

August  :  is  probably  a  witness  of  the  trial  and  execution  of 
Wallace. 

September  15  :  is  ordered  by  the  King  to  appoint  a  keeper 
of  Kildrummie  Castle. 

It  is,  in  truth,  a  humiliating  record,  and  it  requires 
all  the  lustre  of  de  Brus’s  subsequent  achievement 
to  efface  the  ugly  details  of  it. 

Having  crushed  his  great  enemy  in  Scotland,  King 
Edward  proceeded  in  September,  1305,  to  carry  out 
his  scheme  for  the  government  of  that  country, 
which  he  had  already  submitted  to  Parliament  in 
spring.  He  had  then  caused  the  Bishop  of  Glasgow, 
the  Earl  of  Carrick,  Sir  John  de  Segrave,  his  Lieu¬ 
tenant  in  the  Lothians,  and  Sir  John  de  Sandale, 
Chamberlain  of  Scotland,  to  announce  that  the  Scots 
should  elect  a  certain  number  of  representatives  to 
the  Parliament  he  was  about  to  hold  at  Westminster 
in  July.  This  Parliament,  however,  had  been  pro¬ 
rogued  till  the  autumn,  when  the  following  ten 
Scottish  commissioners,  chosen  at  a  conference  at 
Perth,  attended  :  the  Bishops  of  St.  Andrews  and 
Dunkeld,  the  Abbots  of  Cupar  and  Melrose,  the 
Earl  of  Buchan,  Sir  John  de  Moubray,  Sir  Robert  de 
Keith,  Sir  Adam  de  Gordon,  Sir  John  de  Inchmar- 


1306  a.d.]  The  Revolt  of  Robert  de  Brus . 


123 


tin,  and  Sir  John  de  Menteith,  the  last  named  being 
appointed,  by  the  King’s  command,  in  place  of 
Patrick,  Earl  of  March,  who,  though  elected,  did  not 
attend.  To  these  commissioners  Parliament  added 
twenty-two  Englishmen,*  and  together  they  drew 
up  a  constitution,  of  which  the  chief  provisions  were 
to  the  following  effect : 

1.  Sir  John  de  Bretaine  (Brittany),  King  Edward’s 
nephew,  to  be  the  King’s  Lieutenant  and  Warden  of 
Scotland  ;  Sir  William  de  Bevercotes,  Chancellor ; 
Sir  John  de  Sandale,  Chamberlain;  and  Sir  Robert 
Heron,  Controller. 

2.  Four  pairs  of  J usticiaries  to  preside  respectively 
over  Lothian,  over  Galloway,  over  the  district  be¬ 
tween  the  Forth  and  the  mountains,  and  over  the 
district  beyond  the  mountains. 

3.  Sheriffs  to  be  appointed  over  every  county, 
natives  of  either  Scotland  or  England,  the  most  suf¬ 
ficient  men  and  profitable  for  the  King  and  people, 
and  for  the  maintenance  of  peace. 

4.  The  Lieutenant,  Chancellor,  and  Chamberlain 
to  appoint  coroners  in  room  of  those  who  should  be 
found  unfit,  unless  these  held  by  charter,  in  which 
case  the  King’s  pleasure  to  be  taken. 

5.  Provision  for  the  safe  custody  of  the  castles  of 
Roxburgh,  Jedburgh,  Edinburgh,  Linlithgow,  Stir¬ 
ling,  and  Dunbarton. 

6.  The  customs  of  the  Scots  and  Brets  f  to  be 
prohibited  and  disused.  The  Lieutenant,  on  his  com- 

*  Bain,  ii.,  457. 

f  Including  the  ordeal  by  battle  in  criminal  cases,  and  the  law  of 
tanistry  in  cases  of  succession  to  landed  property. 


124 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1304  A.D.- 


ing,  to  assemble  the  good  people  *  of  Scotland  in  a 
convenient  place,  and  there  rehearse  to  them  the 
laws  of  King  David,  as  subsequently  amended  ;  such 
laws  as  should  be  found  plainly  against  God  and 
reason  to  be  amended  by  the  Lieutenant  and  his 
council.  Such  matters  as  the  Lieutenant  might  feel 
unable  to  deal  with  in  so  short  a  time,  to  be  put  in 
writing  by  certain  commissioners  elected  by  the  com¬ 
munity,  with  power  to  confer  with  the  King  and 
finally  determine  the  matter. 

7.  The  Lieutenant  to  have  power,  with  the  advice 
of  the  good  people  of  Scotland,  to  remove  en  corteise 
manere  such  persons  as  were  likely  to  disturb  the 
peace,  and  the  King  might  command  such  to  remain 
south  of  the  Trent. 

8.  Sir  Alexander  de  Lindsay  to  remain  six  months 
out  of  Scotland. 

9.  The  Earl  of  Carrick  to  place  Kildrummie 
Castle  in  the  keeping  of  one  for  whom  he  shall 
answer. 

10.  Sir  Simon  Fraser  to  attend  the  King  before 
December  20th,  and  to  go  into  exile  from  England 
and  France  for  four  years — subject  to  the  King’s 
recall  at  pleasure. 

Then  followed  the  form  of  oath  to  be  taken  by  the 
commissioners  of  both  nations,  binding  them  by  our 
Lord’s  body,  the  holy  relics,  and  the  gospels,  to  give 
good  advice  for  maintaining  the  peace,  especially  in 

*  The  term  probi  homines  then  bore  a  different  meaning  to  that 
which  it  came  to  have  in  later  times.  It  meant  the  vassals,  i.  e.,  men 
holding  land  of  a  subject-superior.  The  more  modern  equivalent 
phrase  was  “  lairds.” 


1306  a.d.]  The  Revolt  of  Robert  de  Brus. 


125 


Scotland :  to  reveal  loyally  any  hindrance  they 
might  know  to  the  good  government  of  Scotland ; 
to  suggest  amendments  in  any  law  and  usage  danger¬ 
ous  to  the  peace  of  that  country  ;  neither  for  hatred, 
affinity,  or  other  matter,  oath,  or  alliance  heretofore 
made,  to  withhold  counsel  to  their  utmost  know¬ 
ledge  and  power ;  to  preserve  absolute  secrecy  as  to 
proceedings  in  council ;  to  declare  the  names  of  any 
persons  in  Scotland  whose  residence  there  might  be 
dangerous  to  peace ;  and  in  all  things  to  advise  what 
was  best  for  the  King’s  honour  and  the  welfare  of 
his  lieges. 

With  this  oath  fresh  on  his  lips,  the  Bishop  of  St. 
Andrews,  one  of  the  Scottish  commissioners,  accom¬ 
panied  by  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  who  was  one  of  those 
charged  to  administer  the  oath,*  went  to  Scotland 
to  discharge  his  sworn  duty. 

The  constitution  secured  by  the  convention  of 
Westminster  must  be  considered  exceedingly  liberal 
according  to  the  doctrines  of  that  time,  and  as  con¬ 
ferred  on  a  conquered  country.  It  must  be  regarded 
as  an  earnest  desire  of  Edward’s  to  govern  Scotland 
as  generously  as  England,  with  which  he  so  ardently 
desired  to  see  it  incorporated.  It  is  true  that  the 
term  “  community  ”  was  restricted  to  mean  owners 
of  land,  but  that  was  the  extreme  sense  it  ever  could 
bear  under  a  feudal  monarchy.  Scotland,  in  spite 
of  the  enormous  sums  it  had  cost  to  subdue  her,  in 
spite  too  of  the  provocation  her  conqueror  had  en¬ 
dured  by  reason  of  the  repeated  perjury  of  her 
barons,  was  to  receive  equal  rights  with  loyal  Eng- 


*  Bain,  ii.,  457. 


126  Robert  the  Bruce .  [1304  A.D.- 

land  ;  and  England  was  to  receive  no  indemnity  for 
her  expenditure  of  money  and  lives.  Edward  had 
vindicated  the  authority  which  he  believed  to  be  his 
“  by  the  grace  of  God,”  by  the  frightful  massacre  at 
Berwick,  by  the  exile  or  imprisonment  of  rebellious 
barons,  and  by  the  execution  of  Wallace.  He  was 
now  going  to  try  the  effect  of  clemency,  and  no 
doubt  he  felt  that  the  Scottish  question  was  at 
length  laid  to  rest.  The  lands  of  de  Umfraville,  de 
Seton,  William  de  Balliol,  and  other  lords,  lately  in¬ 
surgent,  were  restored  to  them  on  their  doing  fresh 
fealty  and  homage.  *  Orders  were  issued  to  the 
sheriffs  of  English  counties,  to  the  effect  that, 
whereas  the  King  desired  that  Scottish  prelates, 
nobles,  and  others  should  be  honourably  and  courte¬ 
ously  treated  on  their  journeys  to  and  fro,  any  one 
using  threats  or  contumelious  words  towards  them, 
or  refusing  to  sell  victuals  to  them,  should  be  forth¬ 
with  imprisoned,  f  Everything  possible  was  done 
to  let  bygones  be  bygones,  and  to  unite  the  king¬ 
doms  in  sentiment,  as  well  as  by  law. 

But  the  fair  prospect  was  shattered  early  in  1  306 
by  terrible  news  from  the  north.  John  Comyn — the 
Red  Comyn,  as  he  was  familiarly  called — had  fallen 
by  the  hand  of  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  and  Scotland 
was  once  more  ablaze. 

Unfortunately,  in  endeavouring  to  trace  the  causes 
which  led  to  this  event,  we  are  thrown  back  on  con¬ 
flicting  and  untrustworthy  information.  According 
to  Fordun,  the  Earl  of  Carrick  had  returned  from 


*  Bain,  ii.,  460. 
f  Ibid. 


1306  a. d.]  The  Revolt  of  Robert  de  Brus.  127 


Scotland  and  was  at  King  Edward’s  Court  in  De¬ 
cember  or  January,  1306.  When  John  Balliol  abdi¬ 
cated,  and  renounced  all  claim  to  the  throne  of 
Scotland,  John  Comyn,  the  Competitor,  a  son  of 
ex-King  John’s  sister,  became  nearest  heir  of  the 
line  which  Edward’s  award  had  declared  to  be  the 
royal  one  of  Scotland.  Comyn  the  Competitor  was 
dead,  but  his  rights  were  continued  in  the  person  of 
his  son  John,  the  Red.  But  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  in 
secret  connivance  with  the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews, 
had  resolved  to  revive  his  claim  as  grandson  of  an¬ 
other  competitor  ;  and  thus  the  dispute  between  the 
houses  of  de  Balliol  and  de  Brus,  which  had  been 
laid  to  rest  by  the  award  of  Berwick  in  1292,  broke 
out  afresh,  notwithstanding  that  in  the  interval 
Carrick  and  John  Comyn  had  been  colleagues 
in  the  guardianship  of  the  realm  in  name  of  King 
John. 

Still  following  Fordun’s  version,  we  are  told  that 
Carrick  made  an  alternative  offer  to  Comyn :  “  Sup¬ 
port  my  title  to  the  crown,  and  you  shall  have  my 
estates  ;  or  give  me  your  estates,  and  I  will  support 
your  claim.”  Comyn,  preferring  the  certainty  of 
solid  landed  property  to  the  chance  of  wresting  a 
throne  from  the  iron  grasp  of  the  King  of  England, 
accepted  the  lands  of  de  Brus  and  bound  himself  to 
promote  his  cause.  A  mutual  oath  of  secrecy  was 
taken  ;  conditions  were  drawn  out  and  sealed  by 
both  knights.  But  Comyn,  setting  no  more  store  by 
the  sanctity  of  an  oath  than  did  others  whose  names 
are  written  large  in  history,  informed  King  Edward 
of  the  whole  matter;  whereupon  the  King  sent  for 


128 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1304  A.D.- 


de  Brus  and  put  certain  questions  to  him.  After¬ 
wards,  Edward,  having  drunk  more  wine  than  was 
good  for  him,  let  out  to  some  of  his  lords  that  he 
meant  to  put  the  Earl  of  Carrick  to  death.  Next, 
the  Earl  of  Gloucester  employed  a  messenger  to 
deliver  to  his  friend  and  cousin  de  Brus,  twelve 
pence  and  a  pair  of  spurs,  which  de  Brus  rightly  in¬ 
terpreted  into  a  hint  to  fly.  Other  versions  of  the  tale 
describe  how,  snow  having  fallen,  de  Brus  caused  his 
farrier  to  shoe  his  horses  with  the  wrong  ends  of  the 
shoes  foremost,  a  somewhat  shallow  artifice  to  de¬ 
lude  his  pursuers,  and  started  for  Scotland,  accom¬ 
panied  only  by  his  secretary  and  a  groom.  When 
about  to  cross  the  Western  Marches,  he  noticed  a 
foot-passenger  of  suspicious  appearance,  whom  he 
stopped  and  caused  to  be  searched.  He  was  found 
to  be  the  bearer  of  letters  from  John  Comyn  to  King 
Edward,  urging  the  death  or  instant  imprisonment 
of  the  Earl  of  Carrick.  The  unlucky  messenger  was 
beheaded  on  the  spot ;  de  Brus  pressed  forward  and 
arrived  at  his  castle  of  Lochmaben  on  the  seventh 
day  out  of  London. 

It  is  futile  to  attempt  to  sift  the  true  from  the 
false  in  this  story.  It  is  likely  enough  that  Comyn, 
who  must  have  been  aware  of  de  Brus’s  pretensions, 
would  do  his  best  to  bring  them  to  nought,  seeing 
that,  if  the  crown  of  Scotland  were  to  be  disposed 
of,  he  himself  had  the  better  claim.  But  there 
exists  one  piece  of  evidence  to  show  that  de  Brus 
stood  high  in  Edward’s  favour  up  to  the  very  eve  of 
his  crime,  namely,  that  on  February  8,  1306,  the 
King  directed  that  the  scutage,  due  by  de  Brus  on 


1306  A. D.]  The  Revolt  of  Robert  de  Brus.  129 

succeeding  to  his  father’s  English  estates,  should  be 
remitted.  * 

Notice  must  be  taken  here  of  a  strangely  circum¬ 
stantial  story  told  by  Sir  Thomas  Gray,  differing 
from  all  other  accounts  of  what  led  up  to  the  dark 
tragedy  about  to  be  enacted — a  story  which  seems 
to  have  been  overlooked  or  intentionally  suppressed 
by  all  other  biographers  of  Robert  de  Brus.  Gray, 
writing  in  his  prison  in  Edinburgh  in  1355,  states 
that  the  said  Robert  sent  his  two  brothers,  Thomas 
and  Nigel,  from  Lochmaben  to  Dalswinton,  where 
John  Comyn  was  living,  to  invite  him  to  meet  Robert 
at  the  Grey  Friars  church  in  Dumfries.  Thomas 
and  Nigel  had  instructions  from  their  brother  to  ride 
with  Comyn,  and  to  set  upon  him  by  the  way  and 
kill  him  ;  but  they  were  so  hospitably  and  courte¬ 
ously  received  by  Comyn  that  they  had  not  the 
heart  to  do  him  any  violence.  They  induced  him, 
however,  to  ride  with  them  to  Dumfries,  where  they 
found  Robert  waiting. 

“John  Comyn,”  they  explained,  “made  us  so 
welcome  and  gave  us  such  handsome  gifts,  and 
showed  us  such  an  open  countenance,  that  we  could 
by  no  means  do  him  any  injury.” 

“  Indeed  !  ”  replied  Robert,  “  then  let  me  meet 
him.” 

Then,  affirms  this  writer,  Comyn  and  Bruce  met 
before  the  altar,  and  Bruce  made  the  proposal 
referred  to  by  Fordun,  that  one  of  them  should 
surrender  his  lands  to  the  other,  receiving  in  return 
his  support  in  seizing  the  crown  of  Scotland. 

*  Bain,  ii.,  471. 


130 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1304  A.D.- 


Comyn  replied  that  he  would  never  be  false  to  his 
fealty  to  the  King  of  England. 

“  No?  ”  retorted  Robert  ;  “  I  had  other  hopes  of 
you,  because  of  the  promises  made  by  yourself  and 
your  friends.  But  as  you  will  not  fulfil  my  will  in 
life,  you  shall  have  your  guerdon  !  ”  and  with  these 
words  he  struck  the  fatal  blow. 

We  have  here  two  accounts,  one  from  a  Scottish, 
the  other  from  an  English,  point  of  view.  They  are 
not  contradictory,  although  different  in  the  details. 
Whatever  may  have  been  the  immediate  cause  or 
the  order  of  events,  there  can  be  no  doubt  about 
the  fact  that,  on  February  ioth,  de  Brus  came  to 
Dumfries,  where  the  Red  Comyn  was.  The  two 
barons  met,  either  by  arrangement  or  by  chance,  in 
the  church  of  the  Minorite  friars,  and  engaged  in 
conversation  before  the  high  altar.  High  words 
passed  between  them  ;  de  Brus  drew  his  dagger, 
stabbed  Comyn,  and  hurried  out  of  the  church.  At 
the  door  he  met  his  attendants,*  Kirkpatrick  and  de 
Lindsay,  who,  noting  his  agitation,  asked  how  it  was 
with  him.  “  Ill,”  replied  de  Brus,  “  for  I  doubt  I 
have  slain  the  Comyn.”  “  You  doubt !  ”  cried  Kirk¬ 
patrick,  “  then  I  ’ll  mak  siccar  ”  ;  +  and,  rushing  into 
the  church,  plunged  his  dagger  into  the  wounded 
knight’s  breast.  Sir  Robert  Comyn  (not  Sir  Edmund, 

*  According  to  Hailes,  Gospatrick  de  Kirkpatrick  ;  but  local  tra¬ 
dition  makes  it  Kirkpatrick  of  Closeburn.  This  is  confirmed  by 
heraldic  authority,  for  the  crest  of  this  family  is  a  hand  holding  a 
dagger,  distilling  drops  of  blood,  with  the  motto,  “  I  make  sure.” 

\  “  I  ’ll  make  sure.”  It  should  be  noted  that  Kirkpatrick,  like 
other  feudal  Knights,  probably  spoke  Norman  French,  certainly  not 
"owland  Scots. 


DUMFRIES. 

( From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros.,  Dundee .) 


1306  a.d.]  The  Revolt  of  Robert  de  Brus .  1 3  i 

as  Barbour  has  it),  uncle  of  the  Red  Comyn,  was  also 
slain  in  trying  to  defend  his  nephew.* 

Bruce,  it  is  believed,  returned  to  Lochmaben,  but 
not  to  linger  in  such  a  perilous  neighbourhood.  The 
Comyns  were  much  more  puissant  than  he  in  the 
southwest ;  so,  having  sent  out  letters  to  summon 
his  friends,  he  rode  straight  to  Glasgow,  where  he 
was  received  with  open  arms  by  Bishop  Wishart. 
This  good  prelate,  notwithstanding  that  he  had  on 
six  different  occasions  solemnly  sworn  fealty  to 
Edward, f  not  only  pronounced  absolution  on  Bruce 
for  the  murder,  but  caused  coronation  robes  to  be 
prepared  for  him  in  the  episcopal  wardrobe.  These 
robes,  together  with  a  banner  of  the  King  of  Scot¬ 
land,  which  he  had  long  kept  concealed  in  his 
treasury,  he  sent  to  the  abbey  of  Scone,  in  prepara¬ 
tion  for  an  event  on  which  he  had  set  his  heart. 

This  event,  the  coronation  of  Robert  de  Brus, 
took  place  on  March  29,  1306.  It  was  the  hereditary 
privilege  of  the  Macduffs,  Earls  of  Fife,  to  place  the 
crown  on  a  new  King’s  head  ;  but  Duncan,  the  earl 
of  that  day,  was  in  the  English  interest.  Where¬ 
upon  there  befell  something  strange  and  least  ex- 


*  Barbour  says  that  many  others  were  slain  at  the  same  time — 

“  Schir  Edmund  Cumyn  als  was  slane. 

And  othir  mony  of  mekill  mane,” 

but  of  this  confirmation  is  lacking.  Of  the  church  of  Greyfriars, 
where  this  tragedy  was  enacted,  a  fragment  remained  till  after  1867, 
built  into  the  premises  of  a  public  house  in  Friar’s  Vennel ;  but  this 
has  since  been  pulled  down,  and  no  trace  of  the  church  now  remains, 
except  in  the  name  of  the  street, 
f  Palgrave,  clxxx.  and  346, 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1304  A.D.- 


132 

pected,  for  Macduff’s  sister,  Isabella,  Countess  of 
Buchan,  appeared  to  assert  the  privilege  of  her 
house,  notwithstanding  that,  as  the  wife  of  a 
Comyn,  she  was  thereby  doing  honour  to  him  who 
had  slain  her  husband’s  near  kinsman.* * * § 

The  names  of  others  who  bore  a  part  in  this  great 
crisis  in  Scottish  history,  and  were  present  at  the 
coronation,  have  been  recorded.  They  were  :  the 
Bishops  of  St.  Andrews  and  Glasgow ;  the  Abbot  of 
Scone;  de  Brus’s  four  brothers,  Edward,  Nigel, 
Thomas,  and  Alexander,  and  his  nephew,  Thomas 
Randolph  of  Strathdon  ;  f  his  brother-in-law,  Chris¬ 
topher  de  Seton  ;  Malcolm,  Earl  of  Lennox;  John, 
Earl  of  Athol ;  James  de  Douglas  ;  Gilbert  de  la 
Haye  of  Errol,  and  his  brother  Hugh ;  David  Barclay 
of  Cairns;  Alexander,  brother  of  Sir  Simon  Fraser  ; 
Walter  de  Somerville  of  Carnwath ;  David  of  Inch- 
martin  ;  Robert  Boyd,;);  and  Robert  Fleming.  §  Some 
of  these  knights  were  to  pay  dearly  for  their  share  in 
that  day’s  proceedings. 

The  news  of  this  fresh  outbreak  and  of  the  double 
murder  at  Dumfries  fell  on  King  Edward  like  a  bolt 
from  the  blue.  He  was  at  Itchenstoke,  in  Hamp¬ 
shire,  when  the  tidings  reached  him,  and,  with  his 
usual  prompt  vigour,  he  issued  immediate  orders  to 

*  A  year  later,  March  20,  1307,  Edward  I.,  at  the  request  of  his 
Queen  Margaret,  granted  pardon  to  Geoffrey  de  Coigners  for  conceal¬ 
ing  the  coronet  of  gold  with  which  Robert  de  Brus  was  crowned. 

f  Afterwards  Earl  of  Moray.  He  is  popularly  known  as  Randolph, 
but  in  truth  his  real  designation  was  Thomas  the  son  of  Randolph 
or  Ralph. 

%  Ancestor  of  the  Viscounts  Kilmarnock. 

§  Ancestor  of  the  Earls  of  Wigtown. 


1306  A.D.]  The  Revolt  of  Robert  de  Brus. 


1 33 


prepare  for  a  campaign  in  the  north.  Sir  Aymer  de 
Valence  *  was  appointed  his  lieutenant  and  com¬ 
mander  of  the  forces,  with  power  to  receive  the 
“middling”  men  of  Scotland  to  the  King’s  peace. 
But  none  who  were  present  at,  or  privy  to,  the  slay¬ 
ing  of  the  Comyns,  nor  any  of  the  rebellious  lords, 
were  to  be  dealt  with  without  first  taking  the  King’s 
pleasure. f  De  Brus’s  castle  of  Lochmaben,  as  well 
as  all  his  lands  in  Annandale,  were  forfeited  and  be¬ 
stowed  on  King  Edward’s  son-in-law,  Humphrey  de 
Bohun,  Earl  of  Hereford  and  Essex;  his  Durham 
estate  of  Hert  on  Sir  Robert  de  Clifford  ;  his  lands 
at  Tottenham,  in  Middlesex,  to  Walter  de  Bede- 
wynde,  and  the  rest  of  de  Brus’s  English  possessions 
to  other  knights.  Thus  the  King  of  Scots  began  his 
reign  a  landless  adventurer.  Even  his  title  was 
taken  from  him  by  the  King  to  whom  he  had  done 
homage  for  it ;  for  Henry  de  Percy  was  made  Earl 
of  Carrick  in  his  stead.  The  earldom  of  Menteith 
was  given  to  John  and  Edmund  de  Hastings,  and 
that  of  Lennox  to  Sir  John  de  Menteith,  the  captor 
of  Wallace. 

Age  and  increasing  infirmity  were  telling  sorely 
on  King  Edward  s  bodily  power,  but  his  fiery  spirit 
burns  as  fiercely  as  ever  in  the  numerous  writs  and 
letters  which  he  directed  in  the  spring  of  1306.  On 
May  24th,  he  wrote  from  Westminster  to  Aymer  de 
Valence,  telling  him  that  he  is  sending  Prince  Ed- 

*  This  renowned  knight  was  at  this  time  about  twenty-six  years  of 
age.  Though  he  succeeded  his  father  as  Earl  of  Pembroke  about 
1296,  he  does  not  appear  officially  under  that  title  until  1307. 

f  Bain,  ii.,  473. 


134 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1304  A.D.- 


ward  to  the  north  with  a  large  army,  but  that  some 
exploit  must  be  done  on  the  Scots  before  his  arrival. 
Two  days  later  the  King  wrote  again,  urging,  above 
all  things,  that  the  Bishops  of  Glasgow  and  St.  An¬ 
drews  should  be  captured,  and  that  on  no  account 
were  any  terms  to  be  offered  them.  The  Bishop  of 
Glasgow  was  taken  at  Cupar ;  and  Edward  wrote  to 
de  Valence  from  Margate  expressing  his  delight,  but 
charging  him  to  secure  Bishop  de  Lamberton,  who, 
he  was  informed,  was  at  the  bottom  of  the  whole 
mischief.  Letters  passed  almost  daily,  sometimes 
more  than  one  in  a  day,  from  the  King  to  his  “  beau 
cosin,”  all  of  them  betraying  his  burning  impatience 
to  be  avenged  on  the  rebels.  Among  others,  Sir 
Michael  de  Wymes  (Wemyss)  was  pointed  out  as 
especially  obnoxious,  and  de  Valence  was  com¬ 
manded  to  burn,  to  destroy,  and  strip  the  lands  of 
that  knight  and  raze  his  house  “  where  we  lay,”  as 
the  King  had  found  neither  good  speech  nor  good 
service  in  him.  The  same,  or  “  worse  if  possible,”  was 
to  be  done  to  the  lands  of  Sir  Gilbert  de  la  Haye,  to 
whom  the  King  had  done  great  courtesy  when  in 
London,  but  now  found  that  he  was  a  traitor. 

An  important  letter  was  written  on  June  28th  from 
Stoke  Goldington,  in  which  the  King,  referring  to 
his  previous  orders  to  put  to  death  all  enemies  and 
rebels  already  or  hereafter  taken,  commanded  de 
Valence,  if  he  takes  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  the  Earl  of 
Athol,  or  Sir  Simon  Fraser,  to  keep  them  in  safe 
ward  till  his  own  pleasure  should  be  known. 

On  June  5,  1306,  the  dread  sentence  of  the  greater 
excommunication  was  passed  on  Sir  Robert  de  Brus 


1306  a.d.]  The  Revolt  of  Robert  de  Brits. 


1 35 


and  three  other  knights.  It  was  pronounced  in  St. 
Paul  s  Cathedral  by  the  Archdeacons  of  Middlesex 
and  Colchester — candelis  accensis  et  extinctis — with 
candles  first  lighted,  and  then  solemnly  extinguished  A 
Edward  was  suffering  from  severe  dysentery, 
which  prevented  his  intended  journey  north. 
Aymer  de  Valence,  however,  succeeded  in  dealing 
what  seemed  a  final  blow  to  King  Robert’s  cause. 
Having  his  headquarters  at  Perth,  de  Valence  lay 
waiting  attack  by  the  King  of  Scots.  Bruce,  with 
such  force  as  he  had  been  able  to  collect,  was  in  the 
woods  near  Methven.  Hither  came  de  Valence  in 
search  of  him,  on  Sunday,  June  26th,  with  a  force, 
says  Barbour,  outnumbering  Bruce’s  by  1500,  chiefly 
composed  of  Scotsmen,  and  far  better  equipped  and 
trained  than  their  opponents.  Bruce  was  taken  by 
surprise,  but  the  roughness  of  the  ground  favoured 
him,  and  his  men  stood  briskly  to  arms.  A  fierce 
hand-to-hand  fight  took  place,  in  which  the  King  of 
Scots  was  unhorsed  by  Sir  Philip  de  Moubray,  and 
rescued  by  de  Seton.  His  men  fell  into  confusion 
and  dispersed  through  the  wood.  Hugh  de  la  Haye, 
Barclay,  Fraser,  Inchmartin,  de  Somerville,  and 
Thomas  Randolph  were  taken  prisoners ;  the  King 
himself,  narrowly  escaping,  galloped  from  the  field 
with  his  brother  Edward,  Athol,  James  Douglas, 
Gilbert  de  la  Haye,  and  Nigel  Campbell. 

As  Robert  Wischard  or  Wishart,  Bishop  of  Glas¬ 
gow,  disappeared  from  public  life  after  his  capture  at 
Cupar  in  1306,  this  seems  a  fitting  place  to  mention 
his  subsequent  fate,  and  to  estimate  his  merits  and 
the  value  of  the  part  he  played  in  active  politics. 

*  Annales  Londinenses ,  i.,  147. 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1304-6  A.D. 


136 

He  remained  a  close  prisoner  in  England  till  his 
release  after  the  battle  of  Bannockburn  in  1314. 
He  was  then  quite  blind,  and  survived  his  captivity 
only  for  two  years.  Though  it  is  impossible  to 
reconcile  his  frequent  changes,  his  repeated  perjuries 
and  breaches  of  sworn  allegiance  to  King  Edward, 
with  ordinary  rules  of  integrity,  yet  his  unvarying 
devotion  to  Bruce  has  secured  him  in  the  affectionate 
remembrance  of  his  countrymen.  His  severest  critic 
cannot  allege  that  he  ever  calculated  which  side  was 
likely  to  win.  When  Balliol  renounced  his  allegiance 
to  Edward,  Wishart  must  have  foreseen  the  hope¬ 
lessness  of  resisting  the  power  of  England  ;  yet  he 
did  resist  it,  in  season  and  out  of  season,  from  the 
pulpit  and  from  the  saddle  of  his  charger.  When 
Bruce  came  to  him,  a  solitary  fugitive  from  justice, 
the  warm-hearted  prelate  gave  him  absolution,  and 
hastened  to  prepare  for  his  coronation.  In  his  eyes, 
all  means  were  justifiable  to  secure  the  independence 
of  his  country.  He  even  used  the  timber  which 
King  Edward  gave  for  a  new  belfry  to  Glasgow 
Cathedral  to  make  engines  of  war  against  the  castles 
held  by  the  English. 

His  deep  love  for  the  Bruce  was  fully  returned, 
and  King  Robert  gave  passing  expression  to  it  in  a 
charter  of  lands  granted  to  the  bishopric  during 
Wishart’s  captivity,  dated  April  26,  1309. 

“  We  feel  in  the  depth  of  our  heart  the  imprison¬ 
ment  and  chains,  the  persecution  and  duress,  which 
the  venerable  father,  Lord  Robert,  by  the  grace  of 
God  Bishop  of  Glasgow,  has  hitherto  endured  and 
still  patiently  endures,  for  the  rights  of  the  Church 
and  our  kingdom  of  Scotland,” 


Sir  John  de  St.  John. 


Murdoch  of  Cumloden. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

ADVENTURES  OF  THE  KING  OF  SCOTS. 

A.D.  1306-1307. 

THE  King  of  Scots  and  his  companions  wan¬ 
dered  among  the  Highland  hills  for  some 
weeks  before  venturing  to  the  neighbourhood 
of  Aberdeen.  Here  Robert  was  joined  by  his  queen, 
his  daughter  Marjorie,  and  his  two  sisters.  Thence 
they  betook  themselves  to  the  west  country,  endur¬ 
ing  great  privations.  Douglas  is  mentioned  as  their 
chief  purveyor. 

“  But  worthy  James  of  Douglas 
Ay  travaland  and  besy  was 
For  to  purchas  the  ladyis  met,* 

And  it  on  many  wis  wald  get. 

For  quhile  f  he  venesoun  tham  brocht. 

And  with  his  handis  quhile  he  wrocht 
Gynnis  \  to  tak  geddis  §  and  salmounis, 

Troutis,  elis  and  als  menounis.”  || 


*  Meat,  j-  Sometimes.  \  Snares.  §  Pike.  |j  Eels  and  also  min¬ 
nows. —  The  Brns ,  xvii. 


137 


138 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1306  A.D.- 


In  this  way  they  came  to  the  borders  of  Lorn. 
The  Macdoualls  of  Lorn  were  of  the  same  blood  as 
those  of  that  name  in  Galloway — sworn  enemies  of 
Bruce.  Moreover,  Alexander  of  Argyle  had  married 
an  aunt  of  the  murdered  Comyn,  thus  the  King  was 
here  in  great  peril.  At  a  place  still  called  Dairy — 
the  King’s  field — a  combat  took  place,  in  which 
Bruce’s  party,  greatly  outnumbered,  were  badly 
worsted,  Douglas  and  de  la  Haye  both  being 
wounded.*  The  King  himself  was  in  great  peril  at 
the  hands  of  three  brothers  called  Macandrosser,  or 
sons  of  the  door-keeper,  who  attacked  him  as  he  was 
riding  along  a  strip  of  narrow  ground  between  a  lake 
and  a  steep  hill.  One  of  them  seized  the  King’s 
bridle,  but  his  arm  was  shorn  from  the  shoulder  by  a 
sweep  of  Robert’s  battle-axe.  The  second  seized 
the  stirrup,  but  the  King  set  spurs  to  his  horse, 
pressing  his  foot  so  heavily  on  the  fellow’s  hand  that 
he  was  dragged  along  the  ground,  and  the  King  slew 
him,  having  first  disposed  of  the  third  brother,  who 
attempted  to  spring  up  behind  the  saddle.  After¬ 
wards,  King  Robert  managed  to  cover  the  retreat 
of  the  ladies,  whom  he  sent  under  escort  of  his 
brother  Nigel  and  the  Earl  of  Athol  to  the  fancied 
security  of  Kildrummie,  the  royal  castle  in  Aber¬ 
deenshire,  which,  it  will  be  remembered,  Edward 
had  committed  to  his  keeping.  Many  years  were 
to  roll  by — many  heads  were  to  be  laid  low — before 
the  King  and  Queen  of  Scots  were  to  meet  again. 

*  Barbour’s  narrative  is  here  confirmed  by  a  letter  from  King  Ed¬ 
ward  to  the  Prince  of  Wales,  September  14th,  heartily  acknowledging 
John  of  Lorn’s  services  at  this  time. — Bain,  ii. ,  490. 


KILDRU  MMIE  CASTLE. 

(From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros.,  Dundee, 


1307  a.d.]  Adventures  of  the  King  of  Scots. 


1 39 


The  Prince  of  Wales  left  his  father  near  the  Border 
and  entered  Scotland  at  the  head  of  a  powerful 
army.  On  July  nth,  he  received  the  unconditional 
surrender  of  King  Robert’s  castle  of  Lochmaben, 
passed  northward,  and  before  September  13th  had 
taken  Kildrummie.*  It  is  the  tradition  of  that 
neighbourhood  that  the  fall  of  this  stronghold  was 
hastened  by  treachery.  Some  one  set  fire  to  the 
forage  stored  in  the  chapel  of  the  castle,  and  in  the 
confusion  the  English  were  admitted.  The  Scottish 
queen  and  princesses,  dreading  the  rigours  of  a  siege, 
had,  on  the  approach  of  the  English  army,  sought 
sanctuary  in  St.  Duthac’s  chapel  at  Tain  ;  but  it 
availed  them  nothing,  for  the  Earl  of  Ross  seized 
them  and  handed  them  over  to  the  English.  Nigel 
de  Brus  was  taken  at  Kildrummie,  with  Sir  Alex¬ 
ander  de  Lindsay  and  Sir  Robert  Boyd.  Nigel  was 
sent  for  trial  to  Berwick,  and  was  there  executed  as 
a  traitor. 

As  for  the  ladies,  singular  directions  were  given 
for  the  security  of  three  of  them.  The  Earl  of 
Buchan,  it  is  said,  wished  to  kill  his  Countess  for 
the  affront  she  had  put  on  him  by  crowning  King 
Robert ;  but  this  Edward  would  not  allow.  He 
gave  orders  that  she,  the  Princess  Marjorie,  and 
Marie  de  Brus  should  be  confined  in  cages  ;  which 
was  literally  carried  out.  But  this  was  not  quite 
such  a  barbarous  punishment  as  it  sounds,  for  Eng¬ 
lish  waiting-women  were  provided  to  attend  on  the 
ladies,  and  the  u  kages,”  which  were  to  be  constructed 
inside  turrets  of  the  castles  of  Roxburgh  and  Ber- 


*  Bain,  480. 


140 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1306  A.D.- 


wick  and  the  Tower  of  London,  were  to  be  made  of 
wooden  lattice  strengthened  with  iron,  and  furnished 
like  a  comfortable  chamber  (et  q  la  kage  soit  ensi  fait 
q  la  Contesse  y  eit  essement  de  chambre  cortoise ).* 
The  Queen  was  to  be  imprisoned  at  Brustewick. 
Two  waiting-women  “  advanced  in  years  and  not 
gay,”  two  valets,  and  a  foot  page  were  appointed  by 
King  Edward’s  command,  “  sober  and  not  riotous, 
to  make  her  bed,  and  for  other  things  necessary  for 
the  comfort  of  her  chamber.” 

Sir  Simon  Fraser  was  executed  in  London  on  Sep¬ 
tember  6th,  according  to  the  ferocious  manner  pre¬ 
scribed  by  the  Norman  law  against  high  treason. 
First  he  was  hung,  then  taken  down  alive  from  the 
gallows  and  his  entrails  torn  out  and  burned  before 
his  eyes.  Next  he  was  beheaded,  the  body  was  hung 
up  again,  and  the  head  was  taken,  with  trumpets 
sounding,  to  London  Bridge  and  there  fixed  up. 
On  the  27th,  the  body  and  the  gallows  were  taken 
down  and  burnt  together  by  special  orders  of  the 
King,  f  The  Earl  of  Athol,  who  had  been  taken  in 
attempting  to  escape  by  sea,  suffered  in  the  same 
way  on  October  29th,  but  inasmuch  as  he  was  cousin 
of  the  King  of  England,  his  gibbet  was  made  thirty 
feet  higher  than  Fraser’s.  The  chronicler  of  the  Flores 
complacently  dwells  on  the  details  of  his  death, 
which,  he  says,  were  arranged  ut  majores  cruciatus 
sentiret — that  he  might  endure  the  greater  torment. 

Sir  Christopher  de  Seton  was  hanged  at  Dumfries, 
his  brother  Sir  Alexander  at  Newcastle.  It  was  in- 


*  Palgrave,  358. 

\Annales  Lomlincnses ,  i.,  149. 


1307  a.d.]  Adventures  of  the  King  of  Scots.  141 

deed  a  bloody  gaol-delivery  at  the  last-named  town. 
Besides  Sir  Alexander,  fifteen  prisoners,  including 
two  knights,  Sir  David  de  Inchmartin  and  Sir  John 
de  Cambo,  were  summarily  hanged,  the  King’s  in¬ 
junctions  being  stern  and  strict  that  none  of  them 
were  to  be  allowed  a  trial.  * * * §  Among  these  victims 
was  Alexander  le  Skyrmyshour,  f  whom  Wallace  had 
appointed  hereditary  standard-bearer  of  Scotland, 
and  John  de  Seton,  an  Englishman,  who,  immediately 
after  Comyn’s  murder,  had  captured  Sir  Richard  de 
Siward’s  new  castle  of  Tibbers^:  and  made  prisoner 
Sir  Richard,  the  Sheriff  of  Dumfriesshire. 

The  extant  record  of  this  wholesale  execution  at 
Newcastle  enables  us  to  correct  Barbour’s  narrative, 
which,  places  the  fall  of  Kildrummie  a  year  later,  and 
puts  the  sentence  on  the  prisoners  into  the  lips  of 
the  dying  Edward. 

Powerful  as  he  was  in  vengeance,  the  King  of 
England  dared  not  violate  benefit  of  clergy  by 
taking  the  lives  of  the  Bishops  of  Glasgow  and  St. 
Andrews  and  the  Abbot  of  Scone,  who  fell  into  his 
hands  during  the  summer  of  1306.  To  do  so  would 
have  been  an  act  of  sacrilege,  and  though  they  were 
put  in  irons  and  sent  to  English  prisons,  all  the  in¬ 
censed  King  could  do  further  was  to  draw  up  a 
charge  of  perjury  and  rebellion  against  them,  and 
lay  it  before  the  Pope.§  Nothing  illustrates  more 

*  Bain,  ii.,  485. 

f  Original  form  of  the  surname  Scrymgeour,  pronounced  Scrimma- 
ger  in  Scots. 

f  So  named  from  a  very  deep  well  within  it,  in  Gaelic  tiobar.  It 
now  stands  a  ruin  in  Drumlanrig  Park. 

§  Palgrave,  328-330. 


H2  Robert  the  Bruce.  [1306  A.D.- 

forcibly  the  peculiar  social  and  political  relations  of 
the  Church  and  State  at  this  time.  Here  were  these 
feudal  prelates,  as  much  at  home  in  mail  and  salade 
as  in  cope  and  mitre — in  the  knightly  saddle  as  in 
the  episcopal  chair.  As  swift  to  shed  blood  as  to 
administer  the  sacraments,  they  were  almost  as  well 
practised  in  the  firing  of  homesteads  as  in  the  swing¬ 
ing  of  censers.  Their  immunities  were  shared  by 
no  lay  subjects.  The  aegis  of  St.  Peter  protected 
them  from  civil  process  ;  not  the  monarch  himself 
could  impeach  them  for  high  treason  :  they  bowed 
only  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome;  and 
it  is  part  of  the  irony  of  history  that  a  fuller  record 
remains  of  their  violence  and  intrigue,  than  of  the 
peaceful  discharge  of  their  pastoral  work. 

Still,  Edward  panted  to  have  all  the  Scottish  bish¬ 
ops  in  his  power,  and  wrote  impatiently  from  Lan¬ 
caster  on  August  nth,  asking  why  de  Valence  could 
not  send  him  word  of  the  Bishop  of  Moray’s  taking. 
That  prelate  had  fled  betimes  to  the  Court  of  King 
Haco  of  Norway,  from  whom  Edward  tried  in  vain 
to  obtain  his  surrender.  Bruce’s  nephew,  Thomas 
Randolph,  of  whom  we  are  to  hear  much  in  years  to 
come,  was  pardoned  on  doing  fresh  fealty  to  Ed¬ 
ward  ;  and  the  nephew  of  Bruce’s  first  wife,  the 
young  Earl  of  Mar,  though  kept  in  prison,  was  not 
put  in  irons  because  of  his  tender  years.  James  the 
Steward  did  homage  to  the  King  of  England  at 
Lanercost  on  October  23d. 

To  follow  the  fortunes  of  King  Robert,  now  em¬ 
barked  on  the  most  perilous  and  adventurous  period 
of  his  life,  we  may  safely  entrust  ourselves  to  the 


1307  A.D.]  Adventures  of  the  King  of  Scots.  1 43 


guidance  of  Barbour ;  checking,  from  time  to  time, 
his  details  and  exact  chronology  by  reference  to 
official  records.  Plenty  of  miraculous  and  impos¬ 
sible  incidents  wove  themselves  into  the  story  of 
the  restorer  of  Scottish  monarchy  under  the  hands 
of  later  writers,  but  none  of  these  can  be  traced  to 
Barbour’s  authority. 

After  parting  with  his  Queen  and  the  other  ladies, 
Bruce  turned  westward  again  on  foot,  with  Sir  James 
Douglas  and  about  two  hundred  followers,  intending 
to  seek  shelter  in  one  of  the  islands.  Nigel  Camp¬ 
bell  was  sent  forward  to  the  coast  to  try  and  secure 
shipping.  The  King,  following  a  few  days  later, 
came  to  the  shores  of  Loch  Lomond,  where  boat 
there  was  none  to  be  seen.  To  go  round  either  end 
of  the  lake  would  have  led  them  into  the  perilous 
neighbourhood  of  John  of  Lorn  on  the  one  hand,  or 
Sir  John  de  Menteith  on  the  other.  At  last,  Doug¬ 
las,  carefully  examining  the  shore,  found  a  little 
sunken  boat,  which  they  managed  to  make  fairly 
seaworthy.  It  would,  however,  only  carry  three 
men  at  a  time,  and  a  whole  night  and  day  were 
spent  in  ferrying  the  party  across.  Some  of  the 
hardy  hill  men  swam  over  with  their  arms  and 
clothes  tied  on  their  heads.  To  pass  away  the  time 
while  the  crossing  was  being  effected  we  are  told 
that  King  Robert  read  aloud  to  his  companions  the 
romance  of  Ferambras  and  Oliver. 

Malcolm,  Earl  of  Lennox,  was  made  aware  one 
day  that  there  were  poachers  afoot  in  his  forest  after 
the  deer.  He  went  out  in  pursuit  of  them,  but  great 
was  his  delight  to  find  that  it  was  the  King  of  Scots, 


144 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1306  A.D.- 


for  he  was  devoted  to  his  cause.  This  encounter 
probably  saved  the  lives,  or  at  least  the  liberty,  of 
the  whole  party ;  for  they  were  hard  pressed  for 
food,  winter  was  approaching,  and  they  dared  not 
leave  the  hills,  except  by  sea.  Lennox  fed  and 
lodged  the  wanderers,  a  timely  aid,  which  King 
Robert  did  not  forget  in  brighter  days.* 

Nevertheless,  the  borders  of  Lorn  and  Menteith 
were  no  safe  resting-place  for  the  Bruce.  Nigel 
Campbell  had  managed  to  secure  some  vessels,  in 
which  the  King  and  his  party  embarked  somewhere 
on  the  Clyde  near  Dunbarton  and  sailed  for  Cantyre. 
Lennox  meant  to  have  sailed  with  them,  but  his 
galley  was  delayed  behind  the  others,  and  fell  in 
with  the  galleys  of  Lorn.  He  was  hotly  pursued, 
and  only  escaped  capture  by  throwing  overboard  all 
his  baggage. 

Angus  of  the  Isles  received  the  King  and  his  men 
at  Dunaverty  Castle  in  Cantyre, f  and  entertained 
them  right  hospitably.  Luckily,  however,  Bruce  did 
not  tarry  long  with  him,  but  sailed  on  the  third  day 
about  three  hundred  men  in  all,  for  Rachrin  (now 
Rathlin),  an  island  off  the  Irish  coast,  about  fourteen 
miles  south-west  of  the  Mull  of  Cantyre.  They 
were  only  just  in  time,  for  Lorn  had  tracked  them 


*  In  gratitude  for  this  service,  King  Robert,  after  Bannockburn, 
granted  Lennox  the  privilege  of  sanctuary  for  three  miles  by  land 
and  water  round  Luss  church,  on  Loch  Lomond. 

f  This  castle  has  wholly  disappeared.  It  was  the  scene  of  a  hor¬ 
rible  massacre  in  the  17th  century,  when  General  Leslie,  of  the 
Covenanters’  army,  slaughtered  the  garrison  of  300  brave  Highlanders 
in  cold  blood. 


4 


'THE  ROCK  OF  BLOOD.”  SITE  OF  THE  CASTLE  OF  DUNAVERTY. 

( From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros.,  Dundee .) 


5307  A.D.]  Adventures  of  the  King  of  Scots.  145 


out.  On  September  22d  Dunaverty  was  closely  in¬ 
vested,  and  King  Edward  was  hurrying  forward 
miners  and  provisions  for  the  siege.* 

It  is  exceedingly  difficult  to  understand  how  King 
Robert,  as  Barbour  affirms  and  as  most  people  be¬ 
lieve,  managed  to  spend  the  whole  of  the  winter  of 
1306-7  in  Rachrin.  That  little  island  was  part  of 
the  territory  of  Bysset  of  the  Glens  of  Antrim,  a 
trusted  officer  of  England.  That  Bruce  was  known 
by  the  government  to  have  gone  to  the  islands,  is 
clear  from  the  orders  sent  by  King  Edward  to  Hugh 
Bysset  in  January,  1307,  by  which  he  was  directed 
to  join  Sir  John  de  Menteith  and  Sir  Simon  de 
Montacute  with  a  fleet,  “  to  put  down  Robert  de 
Brus  and  destroy  his  retreat  in  the  isles  between 
Scotland  and  Ireland.”  f  On  the  other  hand,  if,  as 
Fabyan  and  other  English  writers  report,  the  King 
of  Scots  took  refuge  during  this  winter  in  Norway, 
it  is  very  unlikely  that  Barbour  should  not  have 
heard  of  it,  and  even  less  likely  that  he  should  sup¬ 
press  such  a  romantic  episode.  Neither  is  it  likely 
that  Bruce,  had  he  gone  to  Norway,  would  have 
chosen  for  his  return  to  Scotland  a  moment  when 
his  cause  seemed  utterly  broken  ;  when  his  friends, 
the  Earl  of  Menteith,  Sir  Patrick  Graham,  and 
others  had  surrendered  to  Edward, J  and  the  coast 
was  swarming  with  English  and  Highland  galleys  in 
search  of  him. 

On  the  whole,  it  seems  safer  to  accept  the  circum- 

*  Bain,  ii.,  p.  491. 

f  Ibid.,  502. 

X  Mid.,  495. 


146 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1306  A.D.~ 


stantial  statement  of  Barbour.  He  says  that  Doug¬ 
las,  fretting  at  being  mewed  up  in  Rachrin,  and 
pitying  the  poor  islanders  who  had  to  maintain  so 
large  a  party,  obtained  the  King’s  leave  to  make  a 
reconnaissance  in  Arran.  Taking  with  him  Sir 
Robert  Boyd,  he  crossed  to  Cantyre,  and,  making 
his  crew  row  under  the  land  by  night,  landed  at  day¬ 
break  in  Arran.  The  galley  was  drawn  ashore  *,  the 
oars  and  tackle  were  hidden,  and,  wet,  weary,  and 
hungry,  the  party  crept  at  daybreak  into  ambush 
near  Brodick  Castle. 

This  fortress  was  in  the  keeping  of  Sir  John  de 
Hastings,  who  had  a  number  of  guests  with  him. 
Three  vessels,  laden  with  stores  of  clothing,  arms, 
wine,  and  victual  for  the  castle,  had  arrived  over¬ 
night  and  lay  in  the  bay.  Douglas  from  his  hiding- 
place  watched  them  discharging  their  cargo,  till, 
choosing  a  moment  when  the  garrison  and  sailors 
were  toiling  up  to  the  castle  laden  with  stores,  he 
rushed  upon  them  with  his  men,  slew  some,  put  the 
rest  to  flight,  and  seized  the  spoil.  Strange  to  say, 
those  within  the  castle  did  not  venture  to  the  rescue 
of  their  comrades,  but  closed  the  gates,  and  allowed 
Douglas  to  get  clear  off  with  his  booty.  Needless 
to  say  how  welcome  were  the  supplies  of  arms,  food, 
and  clothing  secured  in  this  lucky  exploit. 

Douglas  must  have  sent  word  of  his  success  to 
the  King,  and  advised  him  to  come  to  Arran  ;  for  in 
ten  days’  time  Bruce  arrived  with  thirty-three  small 
galleys.  A  woman  led  him  to  the  mouth  of  “  ane 
woddy  glen,”  where  Douglas  and  his  band  har¬ 
boured.  The  King  blew  his  horn. 


1307  A.D.]  Adventures  of  the  King  of  Scots.  147 


“  That  is  the  King  !  ”  cried  Douglas,  “  I  know  his 
blast  of  old.” 

Again  the  forest  echoed  to  the  notes,  and  a  third 
time. 

“  No  fear  but  that  is  the  King!  ”  said  Boyd  ;  and 
once  more  the  devoted  band  stood  together. 

Those  who  know  the  beautiful  isle  of  Arran  must 
be  aware  how  greatly  pleasanter  and  more  secure 
was  the  refuge  it  afforded  to  the  outlawed  King 
than  bleak  and  wind-swept  Rachrin.  Nearly  twenty 
miles  long,  and  rising  into  mountains  nearly  3000 
feet  high,  its  glens  and  corries,  at  that  time  densely 
clothed  with  forest,  might  have  enabled  the  fugitives 
to  set  their  pursuers  at  defiance  for  an  indefinite 
time.  But  neither  the  Bruce  nor  the  Black  Douglas 
were  of  the  mould  to  accept  life  under  such  condi¬ 
tions.  The  King  had  no  tidings  of  the  fate  of  his 
wife  and  child  ;  perhaps  he  knew  the  stern  Edward 
well  enough  to  fear  the  worst.  Five  and  twenty 
miles  to  the  south-east  lay  his  own  earldom  of  Car- 
rick.  From  his  post  in  Arran  hills  he  could  trace 
the  familiar  outlines  of  the  coast  round  his  birth¬ 
place  at  Turnberry  ;  nay,  on  clear  days  he  might 
make  out  the  smoke  rising  out  of  his  own  chimneys. 

He  resolved  to  send  a  spy  to  find  out  how  matters 
were  faring  over  there,  and  whether  there  was  any 
good-will  among  the  people  for  their  absent  lord. 
Accordingly,  on  a  day  in  early  spring,  one  Cuthbert 
set  out  to  gather  intelligence.  If  he  found  the 
people  well  disposed  and  the  country  fairly  safe,  he 
was  to  kindle  a  fire  on  Turnberry  Head  at  an 
appointed  hour. 


148 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1306  A.D.- 


Cuthbert  found  everything  as  bad  as  could  be. 
Henry  de  Percy  lay  in  Bruce’s  own  house  of  Turn- 
berry,  with  a  garrison  of  three  hundred  ;  English 
troops  swarmed  in  all  parts  of  the  land,  and,  worst 
of  all,  the  people  were,  some  indifferent,  others  ill- 
disposed,  to  the  cause  of  Bruce.  So  Cuthbert  lit  no 
fire. 

Somebody  else  did,  though,  for  it  was  the  season 
of  “muirburn,”  as  they  still  call  it  in  Scotland, 
when  farmers  burn  the  heather  and  gorse  on  their 
pastures.  A  chance  blaze  near  Turnberry  at  the 
appointed  hour  deceived  King  Robert,  who  at  once 
commanded  his  men  to  launch  the  galleys,  and  they 
rowed  all  night,  steering  for  the  fire.  Landing  be¬ 
fore  daybreak  near  Turnberry,  they  were  met  by 
the  faithful  Cuthbert,  for  he  too  had  seen  the 
light,  and,  distracted  with  fear  lest  thereby  the 
King  should  be  lured  to  his  undoing,  lay  on  the 
shore  to  warn  him  of  his  danger. 

A  council  of  war  was  held.  Matters  were,  in 
truth,  at  a  critical  pass.  Edward  de  Brus  vowed  he 
had  had  enough  sea-faring,  and,  come  what  might, 
he  would  risk  his  fortune  on  land.  Three  hundred 
hungry  desperadoes  need  little  persuasion  to  action. 
It  was  still  dark,  and  all  was  silent  in  the  hamlet 
surrounding  the  castle.  Bruce  led  his  men  along  the 
causeway  he  knew  so  well.  Not  a  scabbard  rattled  ; 
the  Highlanders,  shod  in  deerskin  brogues,  moved  as 
noiselessly  as  wildcats.  Some  of  Percy’s  men  lay 
outside  the  castle,  in  the  cottages,  but  none  stirred 
till,  with  a  wild  war-cry,  the  Bruce  was  upon  them. 
The  Englishmen  were  cut  down  as  they  struggled 


1307  A. D.]  Adventures  of  the  King  of  Scots.  149 


from  their  slumbers.  Percy  within  his  keep,  heard 
the  din  of  slaying,  yet  dared  not  come  out  in  the 
dark,  not  knowing  what  was  the  strength  of  the 
enemy.  The  King,  having  collected  what  spoil  and 
arms  could  be  found,  drew  off  to  the  hill  country. 

The  exact  date  of  this  first  success  of  the  King 
of  Scots  is  not  known,  but  it  was  in  the  spring  of 
1307.  Perhaps  if  we  knew  all,  it  would  be  proved 
that  Bruce  was  acting  in  concert  with  his  two 
brothers  Thomas  and  Alexander,  though  with  far 
different  fortune.  They  landed  from  Ireland  on 
February  9th  in  Loch  Ryan,  some  five  and  twenty 
miles  south  of  Turnberry,  with  Sir  Rainald  de  Crau- 
ford  and  some  hundreds  of  Irish  kernes.  They  were 
attacked  shortly  after  landing  by  Dougal  Macdouall, 
a  Galloway  chief,  and  their  party  was  cut  to  pieces. 
Thomas  and  Alexander  de  Brus,  having  been  severely 
wounded,  were  taken  to  Carlisle,  with  de  Crauford 
also,  delivered  to  King  Edward  and  instantly  hanged. 
Macdouall  was  richly  rewarded,  and  so  were  his  men  ; 
and  his  son  received  from  Edward  the  daughter  and 
heiress  of  Hugh  de  Chaumpaigne  in  marriage  A 

Leaving  his  King  in  the  fastnesses  of  the  Gallo¬ 
way  hills,  Sir  James  de  Douglas  set  off  with  two 
companions  only,  to  reconnoitre  his  own  estates  in 
Lanarkshire.  Coming  in  disguise  to  Hazelside, 
where  lived  Thomas  Dickson,  f  an  old  retainer  of 
his  father,  he  was  joyfully  welcomed  and  received  to 
hiding.  Others  were  found  bearing  enough  good¬ 
will  to  the  family  of  Douglas,  or  enough  ill-will  to 


*  Bain,  ii,  506  ;  Palgrave,  318. 
\  Thomas  filius  Ricardi. 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1306  A.D.- 


150 

the  English  garrison,  to  join  in  a  plot  to  seize  the 
castle. 

On  Palm  Sunday  the  whole  garrison  paraded  for 
divine  service  in  St.  Bride’s  chapel  of  Douglas, 
distant  about  a  mile  from  the  castle.  Douglas  had 
caused  his  confederates  to  disguise  themselves  as 
simple  peasants,  himself  carrying  a  flail,  and  they 
crowded  into  the  chapel  after  the  soldiers.  The 
service  was  proceeding  quietly,  when  suddenly  the 
roof  rang  with  the  slogan,  “  A  Douglas  !  a 
Douglas  !  ” — the  signal  for  attack.  The  English 
were  speedily  slaughtered  or  taken  prisoners.  The 
castle  had  been  left  in  charge  of  a  porter  and  cook 
who  offered  no  resistance  to  the  entry  of  the  blood¬ 
stained  band.  Douglas  and  his  men  sat  down  to 
the  dinner  prepared  for  the  luckless  soldiers;  after 
which,  having  stripped  the  building  of  everything 
worth  taking,  they  piled  the  heavy  stores  and  pro¬ 
visions  together,  staved  in  the  wine  casks,  beheaded 
their  prisoners,  tossed  in  the  corpses  of  men  and 
horses  in  ghastly  confusion,  and  set  fire  to  the  mass. 
The  castle  was  burnt  to  the  ground,  and  Douglas’s 
men  betook  themselves  to  the  hills  to  elude  pursuit. 

This  affair  took  place  on  March  19,  1307,  and,  for 
the  reason  explained  by  Barbour,  has  ever  since  been 
remembered  as  the  “  Douglas  Larder.” 

“  For  mele  and  malt  and  blud  and  wyn 
Ran  all  togidder  in  a  mellyn, 

That  was  unsemly  for  to  se  : 

Tharfor  the  men  of  that  cuntre, 

For  sic  thingis  thar  mellit  *  wer, 

Callit  it  the  Douglas  lardener.” 


*  Mingled. 


1307  a.d.]  Adventures  of  the  King  of  Scots.  15 1 


In  spite  of  these  successful  exploits  at  Turnberry 
and  Douglas,  the  cause  of  Bruce  was  never  so  des¬ 
perate  as  it  was  in  the  early  months  of  1307.  He 
had  not  an  acre  of  land  he  could  call  his  own  ;  three 
of  his  four  brothers,  and  most  of  his  trusty  friends, 
had  perished  on  the  gibbet ;  of  his  other  supporters, 
nearly  all  had  given  up  his  service  as  hopeless,  and 
re-entered  that  of  King  Edward ;  his  wife,  his 
daughter,  and  his  sisters  were  in  English  prisons.* 

On  every  side  his  foes  were  closing  round  his  hid¬ 
ing-place  in  Glentrool.  Four  thousand  foot  from 
Cumberland,  Westmorland,  and  Lancashire  mus¬ 
tered  at  Carlisle  in  February  and  March, f  and 
Edward  committed  the  pursuit  to  his  most  famous 
generals. 

Aymer  de  Valence,  Viceroy  of  Scotland,  smarting 
under  reiterated  reproaches  for  want  of  success  and 
apparent  inaction,^  was  concentrating  his  forces 
from  the  north  ;  Sir  Henry  de  Percy  guarded  the 
sea-ports  on  the  west ;  Sir  Dougal  Macdouall  had  all 
his  men  under  arms  in  Wigtownshire ;  while  on  the 
east  Sir  John  de  Botetourte,  the  Warden,  watched 
the  passes  of  Nithsdale  with  70  horse  and  200  archers. 
Sir  Robert  de  Clifford,  with  Sir  John  de  Wigtoun, 

*  Edward  I.  has  been  so  often  and  so  justly  charged  with  cruelty  in 
the  Scottish  war,  that  it  is  but  fair  to  remark  that,  fierce  as  he  was  to 
offenders  of  his  own  sex,  he  never,  with  the  single  exception  of  the 
sack  of  Berwick,  permitted  violence  to  be  done  to  women.  But  for 
his  chivalrous  scruples,  he  might  easily  have  forced  the  King  of  Scots 
to  surrender,  by  threatening  the  lives  of  Queen  Elizabeth  and  Prin¬ 
cess  Marjorie. 

f  Bain,  ii. ,  506*  508. 

X  Ibid.,  504. 


*52 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1306  A, Di- 


gu  arded  the  fords  of  Cree.  A  special  force  of  300 
Tynedale  bowmen,  under  Sir  Geoffrey  de  Moubray 
and  three  captains,  was  sent  to  search  the  recesses 
of  Glentrool ;  *  while,  most  formidable  of  all,  John 
of  Lorn  was  hastening  through  Ayrshire  with  22  men- 
at-arms  and  800  active  Highlanders.f  The  sketch- 
map  of  the  district,  indicating  the  positions  occupied 
by  the  forces  of  Edward,  will  show  how  little  likely 
it  was  that  the  Bruce  could  escape  their  toils. 

But  it  was  not  only  his  open  foes  that  the  King  of 
Scots  had  to  dread.  It  was  essential  that  he  should 
collect  some  troops  for  his  defence,  and  few  besides 
ruffians  and  broken  men  would  be  attracted  to  take 
service  with  him.J  Among  his  recruits  there  would 
be  sure  to  be  some  ready  to  earn  a  handsome  reward 
by  his  assassination  or  betrayal.  Such  an  one,  it 
seems,  Sir  Ingelram  de  Umfraville  scrupled  not  to 
hire,  a  one-eyed  rogue  from  Carrick,  who  wormed 
his  way  into  Bruce’s  confidence. 

It  was  the  King’s  practice  to  rise  early,  and  with- 

*  Bain,  ii.,  508. 

f  Barbour’s  singular  accuracy  is  shown  here  : 

“  Johne  of  Lome  and  all  his  micht 
That  had  of  worthy  men  and  wicht 
With  him  aucht  hundreth  men  and  ma.” 

—  The  Br us,  lii. 

De  Valence’s  warrant  is  extant  to  pay  John  of  Lorn  for  22  men-at- 
arms  and  800  foot. — Bain,  ii.,  520. 

%  Barbour’s  estimate  of  the  numbers  with  the  King  in  Glentrool  is 
from  150  to  300 — much  nearer  the  truth  than  that  of  Heming- 
burgh,  who  says  that  Bruce  was  lurking  in  the  moors  with  10,000 
foot  !  The  good  monk  never  saw  the  Galloway  hill  country,  or  he 
might  have  been  puzzled  to  explain  how  such  a  force  could  be  fed 
there. 


GALLOWAY 


The  Ging  af  Scots,  with  fl>0~£00men'. 

^  Sir  Ay  m er  c/e  Va-fence,  Guardian'  of 
Scotland  forJfingj&du'ard. 

P  Sw ffenry  de Percy,  Governor  af  Ayr¬ 
shire  and  Ga-lloway. 

L  dbhn  afLom teeth- 800 Highlanders. 


C  SirJlolert  de  Clifford-  SfSirJoh-n-iie  Wiyioim 
B  Sir  John  de  Botetoarte,  with  70  horse' 

and  200  are  hens. 

M  Sir  Geoffrey  de  Mowbray,  withSOO 
Tynedale  bowmen: 

D  SirDougcflMacdouaJl',the  Celtio chief 
of  West  Galloway. 


* 


••• 


- 


1307  a.d.]  Adventures  of  the  King  of  Scots.  153 


draw  from  his  men  for  a  space  every  morning,  gen¬ 
erally  alone,  but  sometimes  accompanied  by  a  page* 
This  was  well  known  to  the  Carrick  ruffian,  who 
plotted  with  his  two  sons  to  waylay  the  King  one 
morning. 

Bruce,  we  are  told,  had  been  warned  against  this 
man  ;  so  when  he  spied  him  coming  with  his  sons 
through  the  wood  to  meet  him,  he  was  not  slow 
to  smell  treason,  especially  as  they  were  all  three 
armed.  Turning  to  his  page,  who  most  luckily  was 
with  him  that  day,  the  King  snatched  the  bow  out 
of  his  hand  and  a  single  arrow,  and  called  on  the 
three  to  stand.  The  father  affected  surprise. 

“  Bethink  you,  sire !  ”  he  cried,  “  who  should  be 
nearer  your  person  than  I  ?  ” 

The  King  repeated  his  command  that  they  should 
stand  where  they  were,  but  the  one-eyed  rascal  con¬ 
tinued  to  remonstrate,  all  the  time  drawing  nearer 
with  his  sons.  Bruce,  a  practised  hunter,  drew  bow 
on  him  ;  the  arrow  pierced  his  solitary  eye.  It  was 
the  only  arrow  the  page  carried,  but  the  King  never 
moved  without  his  sword.  With  this  he  clove  the 
skull  of  one  of  the  sons  who  rushed  on  him  with  a 
hand-axe,  and  turned  to  meet  the  other  who  came 
at  him  with  a  spear.  With  one  stroke  of  his  sword 
Bruce  shore  the  spear-shaft  in  twain,  with  another  he 
smote  the  assassin  to  the  earth. 

After  this,  Douglas  rejoined  the  King,  fresh  from 
the  raid  on  his  own  lands.  De  Valence  now  advanced 

*  My  readers  should  turn  to  Canto  xlv.  of  Barbour’s  poem.  It  is 
exceedingly  thrilling,  though  unfortunately  all  the  details  are  not 
such  as  may  be  repeated  by  a  modern  writer. 


i54 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1306  A.D.- 


among  the  hills,  probably  by  way  of  Dalmellington 
and  Loch  Doon.  Bruce,  watching  his  progress  from 
the  heights,  and  retiring  before  him,  nearly  fell  into 
the  hands  of  Lorn,  who  had  made  a  circuit  to  take 
him  in  rear.  The  King  had  but  three  hundred  men 
with  him,  and,  placed  as  he  was  between  two  forces, 
each  greatly  larger  than  his  own,  it  would  have  been 
stark  madness  to  show  fight.  He  therefore  divided 
his  company  into  three  bands,  ordering  each  to  take 
a  different  line  through  the  forest,  and  appointing  a 
place  and  time  for  re-assembly. 

Now  Lorn  had  brought  with  him  a  famous  blood¬ 
hound,  once  the  property  of,  and  greatly  attached  to, 
Bruce.  He  relied  on  this  dog  to  settle  on  the  trail 
of  his  old  master,  and  he  was  not  disappointed.  The 
hound  fastened  on  the  scent  of  that  band  which  re¬ 
mained  with  the  King,  and  the  pursuit  soon  became 
very  hot.  Bruce  directed  his  followers  to  scatter  and 
seek  safety,  each  for  himself,  while  he  retained  with 
himself  none  but  his  foster-brother. 

Still  the  bloodhound  stuck  to  his  old  master’s 
trail.  Lorn,  feeling  sure  he  had  the  right  quarry 
before  him,  told  off  five  Highlanders,  fleet  of  foot, 
to  run  forward.  These  fellows  soon  overtook  the 
King.  Three  of  them  attacked  him,  while  the  other 
two  engaged  his  attendant.  Bruce  slew  one  of  his 
assailants,  and,  on  the  others  drawing  off,  turned  to 
help  his  man,  and  killed  one  of  the  pair  that  had  set 
upon  him.  Only  three  of  the  five  now  remained 
alive.  The  two  Highlanders  who  had  retired  before 
the  King  came  at  him  again,  but  he  slew  them  both, 
while  his  foster-brother  vanquished  the  fifth. 


1307  A.D.]  Adventures  of  the  King  of  Scots.  155 


But  the  peril  was  far  from  past.  Lorn’s  men  were 
drawing  near  with  the  sleuth-hound  in  leash.  The 
King  was  so  greatly  exhausted  that,  descending  into 
a  wood,  he  declared  he  could  go  no  farther.  It  was 
the  most  critical  moment  of  his  whole  life.  On  his 
foster-brother,  did  we  but  know  his  name,  should  be 
bestowed  the  glory  of  preserving  the  monarch — nay, 
the  monarchy  itself — of  Scotland  ;  for  he  persuaded 
the  King  to  make  one  more  effort,  otherwise  their 
fates  had  been  sealed. 

A  stream  ran  through  the  wood  ;  the  fugitives 
dropped  into  it,  and,  by  travelling  along  its  channel 
for  some  distance,  threw  the  bloodhound  off  the 
scent,  and  so  made  good  their  escape  in  the  forest.  * 

After  a  short  rest,  the  King  and  his  faithful  com¬ 
panion  resumed  their  journey.  We  know  not  what 
harbour  they  had  in  view,  but  it  is  easy  to  under¬ 
stand  that  the  wood,  though  broad  and  thick,  would 
not  conceal  them  long  from  hundreds  of  eager 
hunters.  Leaving  it,  therefore,  they  passed  out  on 
the  wide  moor,  where  they  met  three  armed  men, 
one  of  whom  carried  a  sheep  on  his  shoulders. 
These  greeted  the  King,  and  told  him  they  were 
seeking  Robert  de  Brus. 

“  If  that  be  so,”  said  the  King,  “  hold  your  way, 
and  I  will  soon  let  you  see  him.” 

By  his  language  and  bearing  the  men  suspected 
they  were  in  the  presence  of  the  man  they  sought. 
But  the  King  was  on  his  guard.  He  made  the  three 

*  Thus  Barbour,  lii.,  liii. ;  but  he  adds  that  some  gave  a  different 
version  of  the  adventure,  namely,  that  the  King  went  on,  while  the 
attendant  stayed  behind  and  shot  the  bloodhound  with  an  arrow. 


156  Robert  the  Bruce.  [1306  a.d, 

strangers  march  before  him  and  his  foster-brother, 
till  they  came  to  a  deserted  hut.  There  the  sheep 
was  killed,  a  fire  kindled,  and  preparations  were  made 
for  a  much-needed  meal  and  night’s  rest.  But  the 
King  insisted  that  he  and  his  comrade  should  have 
a  separate  fire  at  one  end  of  the  hut,  to  which  the 
strangers  consented  with  a  bad  grace.  The  famished 
fugitives  ate  their  fill  of  broiled  mutton,  which  made 

o 

the  desire  for  sleep  almost  invincible.  But  for  the 
King  and  his  man  to  sleep  at  the  same  time  meant 
that  neither  of  them  should  ever  waken,  for  by  this 
time  they  had  little  doubt  of  the  intentions  of  their 
new  acquaintances.  Through  part  of  the  night  they 
relieved  each  other  in  watching,  but,  so  great  was 
their  weariness  that  at  last  both  were  overcome  with 
sleep.  Bruce,  waking  suddenly,  heard  his  companion, 
whose  watch  it  was,  snoring  soundly,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  by  the  uncertain  light  of  the  embers,  per¬ 
ceived  the  three  fellows  coming  towards  him  from 
the  other  fire.  He  knew  there  must  be  mischief 
afoot,  so,  rousing  his  foster-brother  with  a  hearty 
kick,  he  sprang  to  his  feet  sword  in  hand. 

His  companion  staggered  up,  dazed  with  sleep, 
only  to  be  struck  down  mortally  wounded.  It  was 
three  to  one  now ;  three  fresh  men,  moreover, 
against  one  “  fortravalit  ”  *  ;  but  such  was  the 
King’s  prowess  as  a  swordsman  that  all  three  of  his 
assailants  fell  before  him. 

Such,  and  many  others  like  them,  were  the  daily 
adventures  of  the  Bruce,  as  recounted  by  the 


♦Wearied,  worn  out. 


1307  A.  D.]  Adventures  of  the  King  of  Scots.  157 


admiring  Barbour;  and  it  must  be  left  to  the  judg¬ 
ment  of  each  reader  to  decide  how  far  they  are  to 
be  admitted  as  literal  history.  Of  this  much  we 
may  be  well  assured,  that  Bruce  owed  his  life  on 
more  than  one  occasion  to  his  great  activity  and  skill 
with  weapons,  and  that  none  of  the  “  gestis  ”  recorded 
of  him  approach  more  nearly  to  the  miraculous,  than 
the  plain  fact  of  his  escape  from  pursuit  in  Glentrool. 

Before  returning  to  the  solid  ground  of  authentic 
history,  room  must  be  found  for  one  more  legendary 
episode  of  this  stirring  time,  which  has  at  least  the 
support  of  heraldry  and  place-names. 

From  the  eastern  shore  of  lonely  Loch  Dee — a 
sheet  of  water  separated  from  Loch  Trool  by  a 
mountainous  pass — rises  a  hill  called  Craigencallie — 
the  old  woman’s  crag.  Here,  in  a  solitary  cabin, 
dwelt  a  widow,  the  mother  of  three  sons,  each  by  a 
different  husband,  and  named  Murdoch,  MacKie,  and 
MacLurg.  *  It  was  on  this  hill  that  the  King,  when 
he  caused  his  followers  to  separate,  had  told  them  to 
re-assemble,  and  hither  he  came  alone  after  the  loss 
of  his  foster-brother. 

He  asked  the  old  widow  for  food,  of  which  he 
stood  in  sore  need.  She  bade  him  come  in,  for 
that  all  wayfarers  were  welcomed  for  the  sake  of 
one. 

“And  prithee  who  may  that  one  be?”  asked  the 
King. 

“  I  ’ll  tell  thee  that,”  quoth  the  goodwife  ;  “  it  is 
none  other  than  King  Robert  the  Bruce,  rightful  lord 

*  Barbour  mentions  only  two,  but  local  tradition  is  positive  as  to 
three. 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1306  A.D.- 


158 

of  this  land.  His  foes  are  pressing  him  hard  now, 
but  the  day  is  at  hand  when  he  shall  come  by  his 
own.” 

Upon  this,  the  King  made  himself  known,  was 
welcomed  into  the  house,  and  set  down  to  a  good 
meal.  While  he  was  discussing  the  homely  fare,  the 
three  sons  returned.  Their  mother  made  them  do 
obeisance  straightway,  and  they  became  staunch 
adherents  of  King  Robert. 

The  King,  so  it  is  said,  desired  to  test  their 
prowess  with  the  bow.  The  eldest,  Murdoch,  let  fly 
at  two  ravens  perched  on  a  crag,  and  transfixed  both 
with  the  same  arrow.  MacKie  then  shot  another 
raven,  flying  overhead,  but  MacLurg  missed  his 
mark.  When  the  widow’s  words  came  to  be  fulfilled 
by  the  King  coming  to  his  own,  he  asked  her  how  he 
could  reward  her  for  her  timely  succour. 

“  Just  give  me,”  said  she,  “  the  wee  bit  hassock  o’ 
land  atween  Palnure  and  Penkiln.” 

Her  request  was  granted,  and  the  “bit  hassock” 
being  of  considerable  extent,  about  five  miles  long 
and  three  broad,  was  divided  between  the  three  sons. 
Hence  the  origin  of  the  families  of  MacKie  of  Larg, 
Murdoch  of  Cumloden,  and  MacLurg  of  Kirouchtrie.* 

Douglas  and  Edward  de  Brus  met  the  King  at 
Craigencallie  as  agreed  on,  and  about  a  hundred 
and  fifty  of  their  men  gathered  to  them.  Douglas 
brought  word  that  he  had  passed  a  company  of  some 

*  Murdoch’s  feat  is  commemorated  in  the  arms  granted  to  his 
descendants,  and  duly  enrolled  in  the  Lyon  Register,  viz.  argent , 
two  ravens  hanging  pale-wise,  sable,  with  an  arrow  through  both 
their  heads  fess-wise,  proper. 


1307  a.d.]  Adventures  of  the  King  of  Scots.  159 


two  hundred  of  the  enemy,  carelessly  bivouacked  in 
Raploch  Moss,  whom  he  suggested  they  should 
attack  at  once.  Falling  on  the  sleeping  soldiers  be¬ 
fore  dawn,  Bruce  and  his  party  took  them  by 
surprise,  slew  many  of  them,  and  dispersed  the  rest. 
A  big  stone  in  Raploch  Moss  is  still  pointed  out  as 
the  King’s  resting-place  after  the  fight. 

During  these  events  King  Edward  had  been 
fretting  on  his  sick-bed  at  Carlisle,  wearying  for  news 
of  the  capture  of  “  King  Hobbe,”  as  he  called  the 
Bruce.  He  had  endeavoured  to  gain  the  good-will  of 
the  commonalty  of  Scotland  by  issuing  a  proclama¬ 
tion  on  March  13th  addressed  to  all  his  officers  in 
that  country.  It  was  to  the  effect  that,  understand¬ 
ing  that  some  people  interpreted  his  policy  for 
restoring  order  as  unduly  harsh,  which  it  was  not  his 
intention  it  should  be,  he  now  commanded  that 
those  who  had  been  compelled  by  the  abettors  of 
Robert  de  Brus  to  take  up  arms,  or  to  reset  the  said 
Robert  by  reason  of  his  suddenly  appearing  among 
them,  should  be  quit  of  all  manner  of  punishment.* 

The  olive  branch  was  displayed  in  vain.  Bruce’s 
cause  was  beginning  to  win  popular  sympathy  in 
Scotland,  and  his  forces  were  increasing.  De  Val¬ 
ence  determined  to  make  a  supreme  effort  to  take 
the  King.  He  employed  a  woman  to  enter  Glen- 
trool  and  find  out  the  exact  spot  where  Bruce  was 
harboured.  But  the  spy  was  taken  and  brought  be¬ 
fore  the  King,  who  frightened  her  into  telling  him 
her  errand,  and  giving  him  information  about  the 
position  and  movements  of  the  enemy. 


*  Bain,  ii.,  508. 


i6o 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1306  A.D.- 


From  what  this  woman  told  the  King,  he  was  led 
to  expect  attack  from  the  south,  where  Glentrool 
broadens  into  the  valley  of  the  Cree.  The  King’s 
seat  is  pointed  out  to  this  day,  a  lofty  ledge  on  the 
face  of  Craigmin,  whence  he  is  said  to  have  watched 
for  and  viewed  the  English  advance.  The  moun¬ 
tains  descend  at  this  place  sharply  into  the  lake, 
leaving  but  a  narrow  foothold  on  either  shore,  where 
men  may  pass  in  single  file.  Disposing  his  men  in 
ambush  on  the  heights  guarding  this  defile,  which 
goes  by  the  name  of  the  Steps  of  Trool,  Bruce  took 
up  his  post  on  Craigmin,  whence  he  should  give  the 
signal  for  attack. 

It  is  not  known  if  de  Valence  himself  was  actually 
present  with  the  expedition  he  had  organised,  but 
at  any  rate  de  Clifford,  or  de  Waus,  or  both  of  them, 
marched  up  the  Cree  with  1500  men.  Leaving  their 
horses  at  the  Borgan  farm,  where  the  Minnick  joins 
the  Cree  (for  beyond  that  point  the  land  was  impas¬ 
sable  for  cavalry),  the  party  ascended  on  foot  past 
Brigton  and  Minniwick,  where  shreds  of  the  ancient 
forest  of  oak  and  birch  still  remain,  and  entered  the 
glen  about  six  miles  above  Borgan.  Everything 
was  silent  and  apparently  deserted  as  they  pressed 
on,  till,  arriving  at  the  Steps  of  Trool,  military 
formation  had  to  be  abandoned,  and  the  soldiers 
clambered  painfully  along  the  steep  shores  of  the 
lake.  They  were  well  within  the  jaws  of  the  trap 
before  they  perceived  any  sign  of  the  foe.  Sud¬ 
denly,  far  up  on  the  side  of  Craigmin,  a  bugle 
sounded  shrill.  It  was  the  King’s,  and  as  the  notes 
died  away,  the  hill-men  sprang  from  their  lair: 


LOCH  TROOL  NEAR  NEWTON-STEWART, 

( From  a  photograph  by  Mr .  Hunter .) 


1307  a.d.]  Adventures  of  the  King  of  Scots.  161 


stones  and  arrows  rained  upon  the  invaders,  and 
great  boulders  crashed  down  among  them.  Then 
Bruce’s  men  rushed  down  the  steep,  and  a  hand-to- 
hand  fight  began.  The  superior  numbers  of  the 
English  availed  them  not  at  all,  for  the  narrowness 
of  the  path  prevented  those  in  front  and  those  be¬ 
hind  from  supporting  their  comrades.  There  was  a 
great  slaughter ;  some  being  cut  down  or  killed  with 
stones,  others  being  driven  into  the  lake  and 
drowned.  Only  those  in  rear  of  the  column  could 
take  to  flight,  and  thus  escape  from  this  dreadful 
glen. 

The  shepherds  still  point  out  a  narrow  strip  of 
meadow  land  at  the  head  of  Loch  Trool,  bright 
green  between  the  brown  mountains  and  the  dark 
waters  of  the  lake,  which  they  call  the  Soldiers’ 
Holm  ;  for  there,  it  is  said,  the  Englishmen  were 
buried  who  fell  in  this  affair. 

Barbour’s  romantic  poem  receives  remarkable  con¬ 
firmation  at  this  point  from  the  prosaic  source  of 
the  Chancery  records.  The  poet  tells  how,  after 
the  defeat  in  Glentrool,  de  Valence  had  “in  his 
hart  gret  angir,”  because  he  found  the  people  of 
Ayrshire  showing  signs  of  disaffection  to  their  Eng¬ 
lish  rulers,  and  beginning  to  favour  the  national 
cause.  This  was,  in  truth,  the  turning-point  in 
Bruce’s  fortunes  and  that  of  Scottish  independence. 
A  letter  written  from  Forfar  on  May  15,  1307,  by 
one  in  the  English  interest  whose  name  has  not 
been  preserved,  announced  to  some  one  at  King 
Edward’s  Court  that  Robert  de  Brus  had  never  be¬ 
fore  possessed  so  large  a  degree  of  good-will,  either 


11 


162 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1306-7  A.D. 


among  his  own  followers  or  with  the  people  at  large, 
as  he  did  at  that  moment.  “  It  now  first  appears,” 
says  the  writer  in  Norman  French,  “  that  he  has  the 
right,  and  God  is  openly  for  him.”  He  adds  that  a 
prophecy  of  Merlin  has  been  discovered,  to  the  effect 
that,  after  the  death  of  Le  Roi  Coneytous,  the  Scots 
and  the  Bretons  shall  league  together,  have  the  sov¬ 
ereign  hand,  and  live  in  accord  to  the  world’s  end.* 
Doubtless  the  writer  had  heard  the  news  of  the  bat¬ 
tle  of  Loudon  on  May  ioth,  for  he  speaks  of  the 
English  army  being  in  retreat,  not  to  return ;  but 
some  marked  change  in  public  opinion  must  have 
taken  place  in  April  to  make  that  battle  possible. 
Notwithstanding  the  manner  in  which  Bruce  was 
hemmed  in  on  all  sides  by  disciplined  troops  under 
experienced  knights,  every  pass  from  the  hills  being 
strictly  guarded,  he  managed  to  give  them  all  the 
slip,  and,  passing  along  the  moors  by  Dalmellington 
to  Muirkirk,  appeared  early  in  May  in  the  north  of 
Ayrshire.  That  he  should  have  accomplished  this 
alone,  or  attended  by  a  handful  of  adherents,  would 
have  been  surprising  in  itself,  even  for  one  so 
prompt,  so  active,  and  so  well  trained  in  woodcraft. 
But  the  astonishing  thing  was,  and  still  remains,  that 
he  was  able  to  take  the  field  with  a  sufficient  force 
to  accept  de  Valence’s  challenge  to  open  battle. 


*  Bain,  ii.,  513. 


Patrick,  Earl  of  Dunbar  and  March. 


Sir  Dougal  Macdouall  of  Galloway. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

DEATH  OF  EDWARD  I.  CAMPAIGNS  OF  EDWARD  II. 

A.D.  1 307-1 3 1 3. 

AYMER  DE  VALENCE,  frustrated  in  his  at¬ 
tempts  to  take  King  Robert  in  Glentrool, 
had  retired  to  Bothwell  castle  on  the 
Clyde  and,  hearing  that  Bruce  was  recruiting 
in  Kyle  and  Cunninghame,  sent  out  Sir  John  de 
Moubray*  to  scour  that  country.  Bruce  detached 
Douglas  with  some  sixty  men  to  watch  his  move¬ 
ments.  Douglas  succeeded  in  leading  de  Moubray 
into  an  ambush  at  a  place  near  Kilmarnock — 

“  That  is  in  Machyrnokis  way, 

The  Edryfurd  it  hat  perfay  ” — f 

and  routing  his  party  with  slaughter.  This  must 
have  been  early  in  May,  for  a  few  days  later  de  Val¬ 
ence  himself  appeared  in  Cunninghame  with  a  large 

*  Barbour  calls  him  Sir  Philip,  confounding  him  with  the  governor 
of  Stirling  seven  years  later, 
f  The  Brus ,  xl.,  33. 


163 


164 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1307  A.D.- 


force,  the  King  of  Scots  having  his  headquarters  at 
Galston.  De  Valence,  who  rode  with  a  brilliant 
staff,  adorned  with  all  the  heraldic  splendour  of  that 
age,  seems  to  have  treated  the  King  of  Scots  with 
the  ceremony  customary  between  knightly  oppo¬ 
nents,  though  the  contrast  between  the  two  hosts  in 
equipment  and  display  must  have  been  a  strange 
one,  and  to  have  been  careful,  by  omitting  none  of 
the  usages  of  chivalrous  warfare,  to  give  him  no  ex¬ 
cuse  for  avoiding  a  battle,  of  the  result  of  which  de 
Valence  can  have  felt  little  doubt. 

Formal  challenges  were  exchanged.  Robert  de  Brus 
had  with  him  about  600  fighting  men  and  about  as 
many  “  rangale  ”  (rabble)  ;  whereas  Barbour  puts  the 
English  strength  at  3000.  But  the  King  had  the 
advantage  in  position.  He  had  chosen  his  ground 
on  the  face  of  Loudon  Hill,  where  both  his  flanks 
were  protected  by  peat  mosses,  impassable  by  cav¬ 
alry  ;  across  the  hard  ground  in  front  he  dug  three 
trenches  uniting  the  mosses,  and  a  passage  was  left 
between  the  trenches,  so  that  the  enemy  might  be 
tempted  to  attack  from  that  quarter. 

The  fighting  began  in  the  foremost  trench,  where 
the  King  himself  was  in  command.  As  usual,  the 
English  sent  forward  a  cloud  of  bowmen,  but  archery 
was  of  no  avail  against  men  lying  in  a  trench,  so  de 
Valence  ordered  up  his  cavalry  to  dislodge  the  Scots. 
Their  attack  also  was  ineffective,  men  and  horses 
recoiling  before  the  solid  hedge  of  pikes.  The  Scots 
had  learnt  a  dangerous  trick  of  thrusting  these  pikes 
into  the  bowels  of  the  horses,  which,  maddened  with 
pain  and  terror,  swerved  from  the  charge,  and,  gal- 


BOTHWELL  CASTLE  ON  THE  CLYDE. 

( From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros Dundee .) 


1313  A.D.] 


Death  of  Edward  I. 


^5 


loping  wildly  back  along  the  ridge,  threw  into  con¬ 
fusion  the  columns  of  the  main  body. 

It  is  difficult  to  account  for  what  followed,  because 
de  Valence,  even  if  he  found  himself  unable  to  carry 
the  position  at  once  by  assault,  had  enough  troops 
to  invest  it  closely.  However,  the  fact  remains  be¬ 
yond  question  that  before  night  the  English  were  in 
full  retreat,  and  Bruce  remained  in  possession  of  the 
field.  It  is  said  that  the  Scots  even  pursued  the 
fugitives  for  some  distance. 

Barbour  mentions  Douglas  as  taking  part  in  this 
action,  and  nothing  would  seem  more  likely  than 
that  he  should  have  done  so,  were  it  not  for  a  re¬ 
markable  passage  in  a  letter  written  from  Carlisle 
five  days  after  the  battle,  to  the  effect  that  James  de 
Douglas  had  sent  messengers  to  beg  that  he  might 
be  received  to  King  Edward’s  peace,  but  that  when 
he  saw  the  English  retreating,  he  changed  his  mind. 
If  this  be  true,  it  shows  how  hopeless  seemed  the 
cause  of  Bruce  in  the  judgment  of  his  best  friends  ; 
but  the  writer  adds  that  what  they  hear  one  day 
is  contradicted  the  next.  He  also  describes  King- 

o 

Edward’s  fury  at  the  defeat  of  his  viceroy,  and  men¬ 
tions  that  he  had  sent  to  London  for  his  tents,  being 
resolved  to  move  to  Dumfries  after  Midsummer. 
Meanwhile,  his  cavalry,  decked  with  leaves,  had 
marched  past  before  him  at  Pentecost,  which  made 
him  pleased  and  very  merry.* 

The  battle  of  Loudon  Hill  marked  the  crisis  in 
the  fortunes  of  Robert  de  Brus.  It  was  the  first 


*  National  MSS.  of  Scotland,  vol.  ii. ,  No.  13. 


1 66  Robert  the  Bruce .  [1307  a.d.- 

time  that  he  had  met  the  English  in  the  open  field, 
and  his  success,  added  to  the  losses  inflicted  on  them 
in  Glentrool,  at  Turnberry,  and  at  Douglas,  did  much 
to  inspire  confidence  among  those  already  enrolled 
under  his  banner,  as  well  as  to  attract  recruits  to  his 
army.  Some  one  has  said  that  success  is  a  horrible 
thing — it  is  so  easily  mistaken  for  merit.  But  ill 
success  must  be  accounted  even  more  horrible,  for  it 
robs  merit  of  the  support  it  ought  to  have.  King 
Robert  now  began  to  reap  the  reward  that  success 
ensures  to  any  cause  apart  from  its  merit.  Still,  it  is 
difficult  to  believe  that  King  Edward,  had  he  lived, 
would  have  been  baffled  in  reducing  Scotland  to  sub¬ 
jection,  backed  as  he  was  by  many  of  her  most 
powerful  barons,  such  as  the  Earls  of  March,  Fife,  and 
Buchan,  and  by  the  chieftains  of  the  old  native  race, 
such  as  the  Macdoualls  of  Galloway  and  of  Lorn. 
Sheer  weight  of  numbers  and  superiority  of  re¬ 
sources,  in  the  strong  hands  of  Edward  “  Long¬ 
shanks,”  must  have  prevailed  in  the  end,  even 
against  one  so  redoubtable  as  his  former  vassal. 

Aymer  de  Valence  retreated  to  Ayr  from  the  field 
of  Loudon  Hill.  Three  days  later,  Bruce  defeated 
Sir  Ralph  de  Monthermer,  who  also  took  refuge  in 
Ayr  castle.  The  King  of  Scots  invested  it,  but  was 
compelled  to  raise  the  siege  on  the  approach  of  fresh 
troops,*  and  retired  once  more  among  the  Galloway 
hills. 

The  violence  of  King  Edward’s  illness  abated  on 
the  approach  of  summer.  He  was  able  to  sit  in  the 
saddle  once  more,  and  prepared  to  enter  Scotland 


*  Scalacronica,  132  ;  Trivet,  413  ;  Ilemingburgh,  ii. ,  265. 


1313  A.D.] 


Death  of  Edward  I. 


167 


without  delay.  He  deposited  his  travelling  litter  in 
Carlisle  cathedral,  in  gratitude  for  his  recovery,  and 
set  out  for  the  Border.  But  his  once  powerful  frame 
was  a  sorrowful  wreck.  He  had  not  ridden  many 
miles  when  the  dysentery  returned  upon  him,  and 
on  June  7th  he  breathed  his  last  at  Burgh-on-Sands, 
within  sight  of  the  land  which  had  set  his  authority 
so  stubbornly  at  defiance.  Froissart  says  that,  feel¬ 
ing  himself  on  the  point  of  death,  he  sent  for  the 
Prince  of  Wales  and  called  on  him  to  swear,  in  pres¬ 
ence  of  the  barons,  that  so  soon  as  his  spirit  should 
have  departed,  his  body  should  be  boiled  till  the 
flesh  quitted  the  bones  ;  that  the  flesh  should  then 
be  buried,  but  chat  the  skeleton  should  be  carried  for¬ 
ward  with  the  army  until  the  Scots  should  be  sub¬ 
dued.  By  his  will  it  was  enjoined  that  his  heart 
should  be  taken  to  the  Holy  Land.  These  direc¬ 
tions,  though  perfectly  in  the  spirit  of  chivalry,  were 
disregarded.  King  Edward’s  body  was  laid  in  West¬ 
minster  Abbey,  and  it  is  recorded  that  on  his  tomb 
was  carved  the  legend  : 

EDVARDVS  :  PRIMVS  : 

SCOTTORVM  :  MALLEVS  : 

HIC  :  EST  :  PACTVM  :  SERVA. 

“  Here  is  the  first  Edward,  Hammer  of  the  Scots. 
Keep  covenant.” 

The  character  of  the  greatest  of  the  Plantagenets 
has  been  amply  discussed  by  many  writers ;  it  is 
only  so  far  as  it  influenced  his  policy  towards 
Scotland,  and  his  conduct  in  carrying  that  policy 
into  effect,  that  it  comes  within  the  compass  of 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1307  A.D.- 


168 


this  narrative.  From  an  English  point  of  view, 
he  was  an  ideal  ruler  for  those  times — a  puissant 
knight,  an  experienced  general,  a  kingly  lawgiver. 
After  his  crusading  fervour  had  cooled,  all  his  great 
energy  was  concentrated  on  strengthening  and  con¬ 
solidating  his  dominions.  He  was  the  first  really 
English  king,  for  though  he  still  held  Aquitaine  and 
Gascony  as  the  vassal  of  the  King  of  France,  Nor¬ 
mandy  had  been  given  up  by  his  father,  and  the 
realm  of  his  heart  was  England.  He  believed  that 
he  was  as  rightfully  Over-lord  of  Scotland  as  Philip  of 
France  was  his  Over-lord  in  Anuitaine.  True,  Richard 
Cceur-de-lion,  in  his  anxiety  to  raise  funds  for  a  cru¬ 
sade,  had  sold  back  to  the  Scots  the  independence 
they  had  forfeited  as  a  condition  of  the  release  of 
William  the  Lion.  But  the  reckless  Richard  was  far 
more  knight-errant  than  King  of  England,  and  far 
more  Norman  than  English.  Even  if  he  had  been 
acting  within  the  constitution  in  surrendering  the 
suzerainty  of  Scotland,  he  had  done  so  in  the  belief 
that  he  was  only  revoking  the  act  of  his  father,  Henry 
II.,  to  whom  he  had  been  a  rebellious  son.  But 
Edward  seems  to  have  believed  honestly  that  the 
suzerainty  was  of  far  older  date  than  the  treaty  of 
Falaise.  The  diligence  with  which,  at  the  time  of  the 
Balliol  controversy,  he  caused  the  ancient  records  to 
be  ransacked,  may  be  taken  as  evidence  of  his  desire  to 
act  constitutionally.  He  reigned  for  nineteen  years 
before  the  question  of  the  Scottish  succession  was 
raised.  He  was  on  the  best  of  terms  with  his  kins¬ 
man,  Alexander  III.,  the  best  king  that  had  ever  sat 
on  the  throne  of  Scotland  ;  nor  wrould  the  question 


1313  A.D.]  Death  of  Edward  I.  169 

ever  have  come  to  be  raised,  had  the  marriage  of  the 
Prince  of  Wales  with  the  Maid  of  Norway  been 
carried  out.  Edward  had  set  his  heart  on  this,  for 
it  contained  the  realisation  of  his  life’s  dream.  He 
had  completed  the  conquest  of  Wales,  and  the  whole 
island  would  have  been  united  under  one  crown. 

Then  came  the  disputed  succession.  This  was 
Edward’s  opportunity  in  one  sense,  for  he  had  it  in 
his  power  to  nominate  a  puppet  of  his  own.  Scot¬ 
tish  partisans  declare  that  he  did  so  ;  that  he  had 
made  private  overtures  to  Robert  de  Brus  “  le  viel,” 
undertaking  to  place  him  on  the  throne  if  he  would 
do  homage  for  his  kingdom,  but  that  de  Brus  refused 
the  crown  on  these  terms.  There  is  not  the  slightest 
evidence  of  such  a  transaction.  There  is,  on  the 
other  hand,  clear  evidence  that  Edward  endeavoured 
to  decide  honestly  a  very  delicate  question,  in  the 
absence  of  precedent,  and  that  he  did  so  in  accordance 
with  our  present  principles  of  law.  In  all  the  pre¬ 
liminary  proceedings  he  was  careful  to  make  written 
reservation  of  his  claim  as  Lord  Paramount ;  that 
claim  was  acknowledged  by  the  Guardians  of  Scot¬ 
land,  and  ratified  by  the  first  act  of  John  de  Balliol 
after  his  coronation.  Thus,  whatever  may  have  been 
the  relations  between  the  two  kingdoms  on  the  death 
of  Alexander  III.  in  1286,  the  King  of  England  was 
the  legitimate  Over-lord  of  Scotland  in  1295,  and 
had  been  acknowledged  as  such  by  the  Scottish  King 
and  people.  The  English  view  is,  that  when  Balliol 
formed  a  treaty  with  Philip  of  France  and  renounced 
his  fealty,  Edward  was  acting  within  his  rights  in 
treating  him  and  his  subjects  as  rebels. 


1 70 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1307  A.D.- 


Viewed  from  the  Scottish  standpoint,  Edward’s 
character  and  conduct  reflect  much  darker  hues. 
Besides  the  accusation  of  partial  judgment  in  the 
award  given  between  the  competitors,  he  has  been 
bitterly  blamed  for  cruelty  in  the  Scottish  war. 
But  this  charge  should  be  dispassionately  weighed 
according  to  the  standard  of  humanity  in  the  thir¬ 
teenth  century.  The  sack  of  Berwick  was  undoubt¬ 
edly  a  hideous  affair,  and  if,  as  is  probable,  it  took 
place  before  the  outrages,  not  less  hideous,  committed 
during  Buchan’s  raid  in  Tynedale,  it  had  not  even 
the  excuse  of  being  a  reprisal.  But  these  horrors 
on  either  side  of  the  eastern  Border  were  so  nearly 
simultaneous  that  they  may  be  fairly  set  against  one 
another.  Neither  side  can  throw  the  first  stone. 
Nothing  of  the  same  kind  ever  happened  again ; 
women  and  non-combatants  seem  to  have  been 
respected  by  both  sides. 

It  would,  however,  be  difficult  to  get  Scotsmen  to 
estimate  without  prejudice  the  justice  of  the  execu¬ 
tion  of  Wallace.  They  are  rightly  indignant  at  the 
judicial  murder  of  the  patriot.  He  had  never  sworn 
fealty  to  Edward,  therefore  it  has  been  held  that 
Edward  was  unjust  in  treating  him  as  a  rebel.  But 
he  was  taken  in  arms,  in  the  act  of  leading  in  rebel¬ 
lion  those  who  were  technically  Edward’s  subjects, 
within  what  were  technically  Edward’s  dominions. 
The  law  under  which  he  suffered  was  a  frightfully 
severe  one,  but  it  was  the  law  of  the  land,  and  the 
fact  that  Wallace  never  swore  fealty  was,  in  his 
judge’s  eyes,  only  an  aggravation  of  his  guilt. 

Then  came  the  atrocious  murder  of  the  two  Comyns, 


1313  A. D.]  Death  of  Edward  I  1 7 1 

and  who  shall  say  that  the  old  King  did  not  well  to 
be  wroth  thereat  ?  He  ordered  that  all  who  were 
present  at  or  consenting  to  the  deed,  should  be  put 
to  death.  The  prisoners  taken  at  Kildrummie  and 
elsewhere  were  hanged  without  trial,  while,  on  the 
Scottish  side,  those  taken  in  the  “  Douglas  Larder  ” 
were  butchered  in  cold  blood.  The  treatment  was 
as  savage  on  one  side  as  on  the  other.  Still,  it  can¬ 
not  be  claimed  for  Edward  that  he  did  anything  to 
mitigate  the  horrors  of  mediaeval  warfare  ;  the  ut¬ 
most  that  can  be  said  is  that  he  did  not  wantonly 
intensify  them.  At  this  distance  of  time,  Scotsmen 
may  well  afford  to  acknowledge  that,  if  they  had  a 
splendid  champion  in  Robert  de  Brus,  they  had  a 
noble  enemy  in  the  first  Edward. 

The  effect  of  Edward’s  death  on  the  fortunes  of 
Robert  de  Brus  was  neither  tardy  nor  doubtful.  For 
several  weeks  before  and  after  that  event,  de  Valence 
tarried  in  the  west,  endeavouring  with  all  his  might  to 
take  the  King  of  Scots.  On  June  1st  he  was  at  Both- 
well,  ordering  800  men  to  reinforce  the  garrison  of 
Ayr,  besides  masons  and  carpenters  to  repair  the 
castle.*  On  the  1  ith,  he  had  moved  his  headquarters 
to  Ayr,  and  early  in  August  was  leading  a  fresh  raid 
into  Carrick  and  Glentrool.  He  was  at  Dalmellington 
on  July  17th  to  19th,  and  by  the  24th  had  scoured  the 
hill  country  as  far  as  the  Glenkens.f  At  the  end  of 
the  month  he  returned  empty-handed  to  Ayr,  whence 


*  Bain,  ii. ,  515. 
f  Ibid. ,  520. 


1 72  Robert  the  Bruce,  [1307  A.D.- 

his  last  despatch  was  issued,  requiring  wines  and 
victuals  to  be  sent  from  Dumfries  for  nine  knights 
whom  he  was  leaving  in  charge  of  the  former  town.* 
Aymer  de  Valence  then  returned  to  England,  and 
either  resigned  or  was  removed  from  the  command 
of  Scotland,  which  had  brought  him  so  little  glory. 
John  of  Brittany,  Earl  of  Richmond,  was  appointed 
Lieutenant  and  Guardian  of  Scotland  in  his  place, 
September  13,  1307.+ 

Upon  Edward  II.  now  devolved  the  command  of 
the  army  assembled  by  his  sire  for  the  subjugation 
of  Scotland. 

The  new  King  of  England  was  heralded  by  a  proph, 
ecy,  singularly  mendacious,  as  the  event  proved. 
Merlin,  it  seems,  had  foretold  of  him  “  that  a  goat 
of  the  herd  of  Venus  should  succeed,  with  a  silver 
beard  and  golden  horns,  breathing  from  his  nostrils 
so  great  a  cloud  that  the  whole  extent  of  the  islands 
should  be  darkened.”  It  would  be  superfluous  to 
repeat  nonsense  such  as  this,  but  for  the  influence 
which  it  undoubtedly  carried  in  a  superstitious  age. 
The  monkish  compiler  of  the  contemporary  Annates 
Londinenses  clearly  attaches  some  importance  to  it, 
and  confidently  pronounced  the  brighter  of  at  least 
two  interpretations  of  which  the  saying  was  capable. 
He  declares  that  in  Edward  II.  would  be  revealed 
the  fulfilment  of  the  prophet  Daniel’s  vision — the 
goat  coming  from  the  west — and  that  by  his  sur¬ 
passing  military  genius  he  would  subdue  the  whole 


*  Bain,  ii.,  521. 
\  Jbid. ,  iii.,  3. 


1313  A.D.] 


Campaig7is  of  Edward  II. 


173 


realm  of  King  Arthur,  namely,  Scotland,  Norway, 
Denmark,  and  France. 

Edward  of  Carnarvon  soon  betrayed  how  little 
of  the  resolute  spirit  of  the  father  had  descended 
on  the  son.  He  accompanied  the  late  King’s  body 
several  days’  march  to  the  south,  and  returning 
to  Carlisle  before  the  end  of  July,  he  received 
there  the  homage  of  his  barons.  His  first  act  was 
to  create  Piers  de  Gaveston,  his  chief  favourite, 
Earl  of  Cornwall,  a  man  whom  Edward  I.,  with  right 
instinct,  had  always  held  in  abhorrence.  Edward 
II.  was  at  Dumfries  on  August  5th,  whence  he 
marched  up  Nithsdale  to  Cumnock.  On  the  25th 
of  that  month  the  English  army  received  orders  to 
march  back  again  to  England.  One  can  but  guess 
at  the  motive  of  this  inglorious  retreat.  The  most 
likely  cause  is  to  be  found  in  the  indolent  and  pleas¬ 
ure-loving  nature  of  the  young  King,  who,  shrinking 
from  the  hardships  of  a  campaign  in  a  stormy  cli¬ 
mate,  and  listening  to  the  persuasions  of  his  evil 
genius  Gaveston,  longed  for  the  dissipations  of  his 
own  capital. 

The  King  of  Scots  was  not  one  to  falter  in  such  an 
opportunity.  No  sooner  were  the  English  over  the 
Border  than  he  left  the  fastnesses  of  Glentrool,  swept 
down  on  the  lowlands  of  Galloway,  and  avenged  the 
fate  of  his  brothers  by  wasting  the  lands  of  Sir 
Dougal  Macdouall,  who  had  given  them  up  to  the 
English*  Sir  John  de  St.  John  commanded  the  Eng¬ 
lish  troops  in  Galloway  at  this  time,  but,  in  conse- 


*  Bain,  iii.,  3. 


174 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1307  A.D.- 


quence  of  the  raid,  the  Earl  of  Richmond  was  directed 
to  march  thither  with  all  the  force  at  his  disposal.  It 
did  not  suit  King  Robert’s  tactics  to  meet  the  new 
Viceroy  in  the  open.  He  harboured  among  the  hills 
he  knew  so  well,  levying  tribute  and  enrolling  re¬ 
cruits.  These  southern  uplands  are  hallowed  in  the 
remembrance  of  the  people  of  our  day,  chiefly  by 
reason  of  the  sufferings  of  the  Covenanters;  but 
that  should  not  obliterate  their  earlier  glory  as  the 
scene  of  the  adventures  of  the  Bruce — the  true  birth¬ 
place  of  Scottish  independence. 

According  to  the  Chronicle  of  Lanercost ,  Rich¬ 
mond  drove  the  King  of  Scots  from  the  district,  but 
there  is  no  evidence  of  any  encounter  having  taken 
place,  and  it  must  have  been  in  accordance  with  his 
deliberate  strategy  that  Bruce  avoided  one,  and 
moved  northwards  in  the  early  winter  of  1307,  in 
order  to  raise  the  people  in  the  national  cause. 
With  him  went  his  brother  Edward,  the  Earl  of 
Lennox,  Sir  Gilbert  de  la  Haye,  and  Sir  Robert  Boyd, 
but  he  left  a  formidable  lieutenant  in  the  person  of 
Sir  James  de  Douglas,  to  carry  on  hostilities  in  the 
south. 

Douglas  began  by  retaking  his  own  castle  of  that 
name,  which  the  English  had  been  busy  rebuilding 
since  its  destruction  in  the  “  Douglas  Larder.”  He 
had  already  made  a  second  attempt  upon  it,  though 
without  success ;  but  this  time  his  plans  were  laid 
with  greater  care. 

It  was  on  the  morning  of  Lanark  fair,  in  Septem¬ 
ber  or  October,  1307,  that  Douglas,  having  laid  a 
strong  ambush  near  the  castle,  caused  fourteen  of 


1313  A.D.]  Campaigns  of  Edward  II. 


175 


his  men  to  pull  countrymen’s  frocks  over  their 
armour,  to  fill  sacks  with  grass  and  place  them  on 
the  backs  of  their  horses.  They  were  told  then  to 
lead  them  in  full  view  of  the  castle,  as  if  on  their 
way  to  the  fair.  Douglas  calculated  on  the  English 
commander,  whom  he  knew  to  be  short  of  prov¬ 
ender,  not  allowing  a  train  of  well-filled  sacks  to 
pass  unmolested. 

Things  turned  out  exactly  as  he  expected.  The 
constable  of  the  castle,  Sir  John  de  Wanton,  led  a 
party  to  capture  the  convoy,  but  just  as  he  overtook 
them,  the  supposed  rustics  threw  off  their  frocks, 
flung  the  sacks  to  the  ground,  leapt  into  the  saddles, 
and  there  was  Sir  John,  face  to  face  with  a  compact 
little  body  of  well-armed  cavalry.  At  the  same 
moment,  Douglas  led  out  his  ambush,  and  the 
English,  taken  in  front  and  rear,  were  overpowered 
and  nearly  all  slain.  De  Wanton  fell,  and  his  men, 
thus  left  without  a  leader,  surrendered  to  Douglas, 
who  razed  the  castle,  but  spared  the  lives  of  the 
garrison.  Of  Sir  John  de  Wanton,  Barbour,  who 
calls  him  de  Webetoun,  mentions  a  romantic  circum¬ 
stance.  It  seems  that  he  loved  a  lady,  who  would 
consent  to  wed  him  only  on  the  condition  that  he 
should  prove  himself  “ane  gud  bacheler  ”  by  de¬ 
fending  for  a  whole  year — 

“  The  aventurous  castell  of  Douglass, 

That  to  kep  sa  peralous  was.” 

A  letter  to  that  effect  from  the  lady  was  found  on 
the  knight’s  body. 

The  national  cause,  which  had  been  greatly 


176  Robert  the  Bruce.  [1307  A.D.- 

strengthened  in  the  north  by  the  adhesion  of  Simon 
and  Alexander  Fraser,  came  near  to  ruin  towards 
the  end  of  1307,  by  reason  of  the  King’s  health 
breaking  down.  Robert  was  still  a  young  man  in 
years,  being  only  thirty-three;  but,  although  of  a 
splendid  natural  constitution  and  great  bodily 
strength,  the  hardships  he  had  come  through  had 
told  upon  him  terribly.  Months  of  exposure,  ex¬ 
cessive  fatigue,  and  uncertain  diet  had  reduced  him 
so  low  that,  falling  sick  at  Inverurie,  he  lay  for  sev¬ 
eral  weeks  in  great  peril  of  death.  Edward  de  Brus 
felt  uneasy  about  the  safety  of  the  King  in  the  low 
country,  for  Buchan  and  de  Moubray  were  known 
to  be  collecting  forces  to  bring  against  him,  and  Ed¬ 
ward  was  unwilling  to  meet  them  in  battle  unless 
the  King  were  able  to  lead  his  men  in  person. 
Therefore  a  move  was  made  to  the  Sliach,  a  hilly 
part  of  Drumblade  parish  in  north-west  Aberdeen¬ 
shire,  whither  the  King  was  carried  in  a  litter. 
Here  the  hill  called  Robin’s  Height  is  supposed  to 
mark  the  site  of  the  King’s  headquarters,  and,  with 
the  Meet  Hillock,  to  have  been  put  in  a  state  of 
defence. 

Buchan  advanced  to  the  attack,  but,  as  it  seems, 
without  much  spirit.  During  three  days,  the  coun¬ 
try  being  covered  with  snow,  he  “  bikkered  ”  the 
King’s  men  with  his  archers.  Edward  de  Brus,  be¬ 
ing  badly  provisioned,  could  not  hold  the  position 
any  longer,  so  the  King  was  again  put  in  his  litter 
and  placed  in  the  centre  of  the  column,  which  marched 
out  in  full  view  of  the  enemy.  For  some  unknown 
reason,  Buchan,  who  outnumbered  his  enemy  by 


1313  A. D.i  Campaigns  of  Edward  II 


1 77 


two  to  one,  allowed  them  to  decamp  unmolested, 
and  reach  Strathbogie,  where  the  sick  King  rested 
for  some  days.  Thence,  as  he  began  to  get  stronger, 
they  moved  him  to  his  old  quarters  at  Inverurie, 
preferring  the  risk  of  being  attacked  in  the  plains  to 
the  certainty  of  starvation  in  the  hills. 

Buchan,  with  Sir  David  de  Brechin  and  Sir  John 
de  Moubray,  lay  at  Old  Meldrum.  On  Christmas 
Eve,  1307,  de  Brechin  beat  up  Bruce’s  quarters  at 
Inverurie  at  daybreak,  slaying  some  of  the  outposts 
and  driving  the  rest  into  the  village.  The  news  of 
this  brush  with  the  enemy  acted  like  a  tonic  on  the 
sick  King,  who  declared  it  did  him  more  good  than 
all  the  drugs  they  had  been  giving  him — not,  per¬ 
haps,  an  extravagant  statement,  if  account  be  taken 
of  the  state  of  chirurgery  in  the  fourteenth  century. 

For  several  months  after  this  we  hear  no  more  of 
either  Bruce  or  Buchan.  It  is  quite  likely  that  Bu¬ 
chan  s  inactivity  was  the  result  of  the  growing  popu¬ 
larity  of  Bruce  and  the  idea  of  independence.  Failing 
some  such  reason,  it  seems  amazing  that  such  a  fa¬ 
vourable  chance  of  capturing  or  crushing  the  King  of 
Scots  was  allowed  to  slip.  Barbour,  whose  faithful¬ 
ness  in  recording  numbers  has  already  been  noticed, 
puts  Bruce  s  force  at  no  more  than  700,  and  great 
must  have  been  the  difficulty  of  supporting  even  so 
small  a  number,  had  the  country  been  generally  hos¬ 
tile.  Whatever  may  have  been  his  excuse,  Buchan 
was  to  pay  a  heavy  price  for  his  want  of  vigour. 
The  King  of  Scots,  by  this  time  convalescent,  sur¬ 
prised  him  at  Old  Meldrum  on  May  22,  1308,  routed 
his  men,  and  then  proceeded  to  lay  waste  his  lands 


i78 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1307  A.D.- 


in  such  sort  that  this  raid  was  long  afterwards  re¬ 
membered  as  the  “  Hership  of  Buchan.” 

“  Eftir  that  wele  fifty  yher  . 

Men  menit  * * * §  the  herschip  f  of  Bouchane.”| 

Buchan  made  no  attempt  to  protect  his  lands,  but 
passed  south  with  de  Moubray,  leaving  his  unhappy 
tenants  to  their  fate.  Henceforward  he  made  Gallo¬ 
way  his  peculiar  care,  of  which  district  he  had  been 
appointed  warden,  while  to  Sir  John  de  Moubray 
was  committed  Annandale,  and  Carrick  to  Sir  Ingel- 
ram  de  Umfraville.§  Robert  de  Umfraville,  Earl  of 
Angus,  and  Sir  William  de  Ros  of  Hamelake  were 
made  by  Edward  II.  his  joint  Lieutenants  and  Guar¬ 
dians  of  Scotland,  in  place  of  the  Earl  of  Richmond. 
They  were  to  have  special  charge  of  the  district  be¬ 
tween  Berwick  and  Forth.  From  the  Forth  to  the 
Orkneys  the  command  was  entrusted  to  Sir  Alex¬ 
ander  de  Abernethy,  Sir  Edmund  de  Hastings,  and 
Sir  John  FitzMarmaduke.  Recapitulation  of  these 
details  may  seem  tedious,  but  it  is  only  on  examining 
them  that  it  becomes  apparent  how  great  were  the 
odds  against  which  Robert  de  Brus  had  matched 

*  Moaned  for. 

|  Devastation. 

X  The  Brtis ,  lxx. ,  6.  Barbour  is  here  telling  of  what  was  within  his 
own  knowledge.  People  in  Aberdeenshire  were  still  talking  of  the 
hership  of  Buchan  when  he,  the  Archdeacon  of  Aberdeen,  was  writ¬ 
ing  his  poem.  The  late  Lord  Salton  was  of  opinion  that  the  battle 
took  place  on  Christmas  Eve,  1307  (The  Frasers  of  Philorth,  vol.  i., 
pp.  62,  63,  vol.  ii. ,  pp.  183-194);  but  Fordun  mentions  Ascension 
Day  (May  22,  1308)  as  the  date,  and  Mr.  Bain  gives  good  grounds 
for  his  accuracy  on  this  point  (Bain,  iii. ,  p.  xii.,  note). 

§  Bain,  iii.,  9. 


1313  A.D.]  Campaigns  of  Edward  II. 


179 


himself,  and  how  the  King  of  England  followed  the 
example  of  his  father  in  employing  his  best  officers 
in  the  task  of  quelling  the  movement. 

But  how  great  is  the  contrast  between  the  docu¬ 
ment  in  which  these  appointments  are  notified  *  and 
the  imperious  missives  of  the  first  Edward !  An 
army  had  been  ordered  to  assemble  at  Carlisle  on 
August  23,  1308,  to  carry  on  the  Scottish  war, 
“  nevertheless  the  King  for  divers  reasons  delays  the 
said  aid  of  men-at-arms  at  that  date,  for  he  does  not 
mean  to  go  to  Scotland  so  soon  as  he  thought.  Also, 
the  foot  to  be  warned  not  to  come  to  Carlisle  yet. 
So  also  the  carriages  to  be  countermanded.” 

Nor  was  this  all.  Edward,  indeed,  declared  that 
he  would  make  no  truce  with  Robert  de  Brus,  “  but 
the  Wardens  of  Scotland  there  may  take  such  [truce] 
as  long  as  possible,  provided  that  the  King  [Edward] 
may  continue  to  furnish  his  castles  with  men  and 
victuals.”  The  endorsement  of  this  memorandum 
is  still  more  explicit,  and  marks  a  remarkable  change 
in  the  relative  positions  of  the  two  Kings.  The  fol¬ 
lowing  is  a  translation  of  the  original  French: 

“  Letters  of  credence  in  Sir  John  le  fuiz  Marmeduk’s  name,  to  be 
written  to  the  Earl  of  Angus  and  Sir  William  de  Ros  of  Hamelake, 
the  Guardians  of  Scotland,  that  it  is  the  King’s  pleasure  they  take 
truce  from  Robert  de  Bruys,  as  from  themselves,  as  long  as  they  can, 
but  not  beyond  the  month  of  Pasques  (Easter,  1309),  so  that  if  on  one 
side  or  other  people  are  taken  or  misprision  made,  it  may  be  redressed  ; 
and  the  King  [Edward]  to  victual  and  garrison  his  castles  during  the 
truce  ;  and  that  he  may  break  the  truce  at  pleasure,  if  the  others  will 
yield  this  point  ;  but  if  they  will  not,  the  truce  is  to  be  made  with¬ 
out  it.” 


*  Bain,  iii. ,  9. 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1307  A. D.- 


1 8o 


In  fact,  the  King  of  England  had  troubles  enough 
at  home  to  justify  him  in  making  almost  any  terms 
with  the  King  of  Scots.  The  clouds  of  coming  tem¬ 
pest  were  gathering  round  him.  The  honours  with 
which  he  had  loaded  his  Gascon  favourite,  Piers 
Gaveston,  had  infuriated  his  English  barons,  who 
had  refused  to  allow  the  King  to  be  crowned,  until  he 
would  agree  to  let  their  demands  be  submitted  to 
Parliament.  The  coronation,  it  is  true,  had  been 
performed  on  February  25th,  but  the  dispute  re¬ 
mained  as  violent  as  before. 

There  is  nothing  to  show  whether  the  English 
commanders  made  overtures  to  Bruce  according  to 
their  instructions  ;  though  perhaps  an  undated  letter 
from  the  Earl  of  Ross,  making  excuses  for  having 
taken  truce  from  Robert  de  Brus,  may  be  referred  to 
this  period.  It  is  certain  that  if  any  proposals  were 
made  to  him,  the  King  of  Scots  was  far  too  stern  in 
his  purpose  to  listen  to  them.  No  doubt  his  many 
friends  and  kinsmen  at  the  English  Court  would  keep 
him  well  informed  of  Edward's  difficulties.  Every 
day  brought  him  fresh  adherents.  Sir  David  de 
Brechin — the  same  who  led  the  successful  reconnais¬ 
sance  against  Bruce’s  entrenchments  at  Inverurie — 
had  shut  himself  up  in  his  castle  of  Brechin  after 
Buchan’s  defeat  at  Old  Meldrum.  David,  Earl  of 
Athol,  son  of  the  earl  executed  after  the  capture  of 
Kildrummie,  sat  down  before  it,  and  succeeded  in 
persuading  the  knight  to  surrender  and  join  the 
national  cause.  In  the  south,  Sir  James  Douglas 
scored  a  still  more  important  success.  He  must  have 
found  the  men  of  Tweeddale  well  disposed  to  Bruce, 


1313  a.d.]  Campaigns  of  Edward  II. 


1 8  r 


for  the  lands  of  Aymer  de  Valence,  now  Earl  of 
Pembroke,  were  forfeited  by  King  Edward,  because 
his  tenants  had  “  traitorously  joined  Robert  de 
Brus.”  One  night  Douglas  arrived  at  a  house  on 
the  Water  of  Lyne,  intending  to  rest  there  till  the 
morrow ;  but  he  found  it  already  occupied.  Cau¬ 
tiously  approaching  a  window,  he  listened  to  the 
voices  within,  and,  from  the  nature  of  certain  ex¬ 
pressions,*  judged  that  there  were  strangers  there. 
He  caused  his  men  to  surround  the  house,  and  burst¬ 
ing  open  the  door,  surprised  the  inmates  before  they 
could  get  into  their  harness.  There  was  a  confused 
struggle  in  the  dark,  in  which  Adam  de  Gordon  and 
some  soldiers  escaped  ;  but  they  left  behind  them 
two  prisoners  of  great  value — no  less  than  Thomas, 
the  son  of  Randolph  of  Strathdon,  King  Robert’s 
nephew,  and  Sir  Alexander  of  Bonkill,  brother  of 
James  the  Steward  and  first  cousin  of  Douglas. 

The  King  of  Scots,  when  Thomas  was  brought  be- 
before  him,  said  he  hoped  his  nephew  would  be  rec¬ 
onciled  now  to  his  rightful  monarch.  But  Thomas 
(who  in  deference  to  popular  custom  must  be  referred 
to  henceforward  under  the  name  of  Randolph)  is 
said  to  have  answered  fiercely,  taunting  his  uncle 
with  having  challenged  the  King  of  England  to 


*  “  Nerhand  the  hous,  sa  listnet  he, 

And  herd  thar  sawis  ilke  dele  [every  part  of  what  they  said], 
And  be  that  persavit  wele 

That  tha  war  strange  men.” — The  Brus ,  lxxiv.,  15. 

In  the  Edinburgh  MS.  (1489)  the  second  line  runs  : 

“  Herd  ane  say  tharin  *  the  Dewill.’  ” 


1 82 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1307  A.D.- 


open  war,  yet  stooping  to  unknightly  ruses.  Upon 
this  the  King  ordered  him  into  prison,  which  soon 
brought  the  young  esquire  to  a  more  proper  frame 
of  mind,  and  before  March,  1309,  he  had  so  far  com¬ 
mitted  himself  that  King  Edward  forfeited  his 
manor  of  Stitchel  in  Roxburghshire,  and  bestowed 
it  on  Adam  de  Gordon,  who  had  escaped  from 
Douglas  on  the  night  of  Randolph’s  capture.*  Ran¬ 
dolph  was  soon  after  this  created  Earl  of  Moray,  a 
name  he  was  to  make  famous  by  services  which 
amply  atoned  for  his  early  disaffection  to  the  Bruce. 
Bonkill  must  have  made  his  escape,  because  four 
years  later  he  was  still  in  dutiful  relations  to  Edward 
II.,  but  both  he  and  Gordon  made  submission  to 
Bruce  before  the  battle  of  Bannockburn,  f 

Bruce’s  ancient  ally  and  adviser,  de  Lamberton, 
Bishop  of  St.  Andrews,  having  lain  in  prison  for 
more  than  a  year,  was  released  at  this  time  by  King 
Edward,  who  told  the  Pope  he  relied  on  the  Bishop’s 
influence  to  bring  the  Scots  to  terms.  The  Bishop 
had  to  find  security  for  his  good  behaviour,  to  swear 
fealty  to  Edward,  and  to  pay  a  fine  of  six  thousand 
marks. 

For  some  weeks  after  the  raid  of  Buchan,  the 
King  of  Scots  seems  to  have  kept  very  quiet,  gather¬ 
ing  strength  after  his  illness  and  organising  his  re¬ 
sources.  But  before  the  end  of  the  summer  of  1308, 
Edward  de  Brus  had  taken  the  field  again  and  was 

*  Stitchel  remained  the  property  of  the  Gordons  of  Lochinvar  till 
1628,  when  John,  afterwards  Viscount  Kenmure,  sold  it  to  Roberi 
Pringle. 

f  Bain,  iii.,  54. 


1313  A. D.]  Campaigns  of  Edward  II.  183 

carrying  all  before  him  in  Galloway.  This  prince 
seems  to  have  had  the  gifts  of  physical  strength, 
military  capacity,  and  the  art  of  inspiring  enthusiasm 
in  a  degree  only  second  to  the  King  himself. 

“  This  Schir  Eduard,  forsuth  I  hicht, 

Was  of  his  handis  ane  nobill  knicht, 

And  in  blithnes  swet  and  joly  ; 

Bot  he  was  outrageous  hardy, 

•  •  •  • 

He  discumfit  comonly 
Mony  with  quhene.”  * 

The  English  commanders  in  Galloway  were  Sir 
Ingelram  de  Umfraville,  kinsman  of  the  murdered 
Comyn  and  brother  of  the  Earl  of  Angus,  and  Sir 
John  de  St.  John  (not  “  schir  Amy  of  Sancte  Johne  ” 
as  Barbour  has  it).  Sir  Ingelram  was  of  such  high 
renown  in  chivalry  that  he  was  distinguished  wher¬ 
ever  he  went  by  a  red  cap,  borne  before  him  on  a 
spear  point.  Edward  de  Brus  entering  Galloway 
from  the  north  by  the  passes  from  Ayrshire,  en¬ 
countered  and  defeated  these  two  commanders 
somewhere  on  the  Cree  (probably  on  the  favourite 
camping-ground  which  now  forms  Kirouchtrie  park), 
and  forced  them  to  retire  to  Buittle  castle.  St. 
John  went  to  England  for  reinforcements  and  re¬ 
turned  with  1500  horse,  determined  to  disperse  de 
Brus’s  band.  Edward  de  Brus,  however,  got  timely 
warning  of  his  approach,  and  disposing  his  infantry 
in  ambush  in  a  deep  glen,  rode  out  to  reconnoitre 
with  some  fifty  light  horse.  Sir  Alan  de  Cathcart, 
who  was  present  with  de  Brus  in  this  affair,  de- 


*  “  Many  with  few.” —  The  Brus ,  lxxiii.,  9. 


1 84 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1307  A.D.- 


scribed  to  Barbour  what  followed.  The  Scots, 
favoured  by  a  thick  mist,  drew  near  the  line  of  St. 
John’s  march,  fell  suddenly  out  of  the  darkness  upor 
his  flank,  rode  through  and  through  the  column 
three  times,  and  put  the  English  to  flight. 

This  brilliant  exploit  brought  in  many  of  the 
people  of  Galloway  to  King  Robert’s  peace,  so  that 
one  by  one  the  fortresses  of  that  country  fell  into 
Edward  de  Brus’s  hands,  the  English  garrisons  were 
driven  out,  and  by  the  end  of  the  year  the  land  was 
pretty  well  subdued.  Dougal  Macdouall,  the  native 
chief  of  Galloway,  had  to  fly  before  those  whose 
displeasure  he  had  done  so  much  to  earn,  and  King 
Edward  granted  him  the  manor  of  Temple-Couton 
in  Yorkshire  as  a  reward  for  his  services. 

Edward  de  Brus  having  thus  humbled  the  pride 
of  the  Macdoualls  of  Galloway,  King  Robert  turned 
his  attention  to  the  west,  where  the  other  branch  of 
that  clan,  under  Alexander  of  Argyll  and  his  son 
John  of  Lorn,  still  resisted  his  authority. 

It  was  probably  in  August,  1308,  that  Bruce  en¬ 
tered  Argyll  by  the  foot  of  Ben  Cruachan — 

Crechanben  hicht  that  montane, 

I  trow  that  nocht  in  all  Bretane 
Ane  hear  *  hill  may  fundin  be.”  f 

The  trusty  Douglas  was  with  the  King  once  more, 
and  Bruce,  finding  the  passes  strongly  beset  with 
Highlanders,  detached  him  to  take  the  defenders  in 
flank,  while  he  himself  advanced  up  the  defile.  By 
these  tactics  he  won  the  pass,  and  drove  Argyll’s 


*  Higher. 

f  The  Brus ,  lxxv.,  27. 


1313  a.d.]  Campaigns  of  Edward  II. 


185 


men  before  him  along  the  shores  of  Loch  Awe  to 
the  pass  of  Brander,  where  the  river  Awe  flows  deep 
and  dark  from  the  great  lake.  The  rest  of  the 
autumn  and  winter  was  employed  in  reducing  the 
stronghold  of  Dunstaffnage,  which  must  have  fallen 
before  March,  1309,  for  on  the  16th  of  that  month 
King  Robert  held  his  first  Parliament  at  St.  An¬ 
drews.  On  March  nth,  John  of  Lorn  wrote  to 
inform  King  Edward  that  Robert  de  Brus  had  in¬ 
vaded  his  country  with  10,000  or  15,000  men 
(assuredly  an  exaggeration),  and  that  he  had  only 
800  with  which  to  resist  him,  for  the  barons  of 
Argyll  would  afford  him  no  help.  Yet  he  says  that 
Bruce  had  asked  for  a  truce,  which  he  had  granted 
for  a  short  time,  in  order  to  allow  English  reinforce¬ 
ments  to  arrive.  This  alleged  truce,  the  truce  for 
which  Lorn  represents  the  King  of  Scots  as  suing, 
was,  in  fact,  part  of  the  terms  granted  to  Alexander 
of  Argyll  when  he  surrendered  Dunstaffnage  ;  but 
John  took  to  his  galleys  and  escaped  to  England. 
H  is  father  must  have  followed  him  thither  later,  for 
both  were  in  council  at  Westminster,  with  other 
“  loyal  Scots,”  on  June  16th.  Thus  Barbour’s  state¬ 
ment  that  Alexander  submitted,  while  his  son  John 
took  shipping  and  fled  to  England,  may  be  recon¬ 
ciled  with  the  apparently  contradictory  one  by  For- 
dun,  that  Alexander  refused  homage  and  fled  to 
England.  Neither  of  these  chiefs  ever  returned  to 
Scotland.  Alexander  died  in  Ireland  in  1309,  but 
John  continued  in  the  service  of  England  till  his 
death  in  1317.* 


*  Bain,  iii.,  37. 


1 86  Robert  the  Bruce .  [1307  a.d.~ 

King  Edward’s  diplomacy  had  now  won  over  the 
Pope  to  his  interest.  Clement  V.  issued  a  mandate 
of  excommunication  against  Robert,  Earl  of  Car- 
rick,  recalling  his  broken  vows  of  fealty  to  Edward 
I.,  his  murder  of  Comyn,  and  reciting  how,  not  con¬ 
tent  with  these  crimes,  but  “  damnably  persevering 
in  iniquity,”  he  had  treated  with  contempt  the  let¬ 
ters  of  excommunication  issued  against  him  by  the 
Bishop  of  London.  Milder  measures  were  tried  also, 
for  Edward  was  in  no  condition  to  wage  war  at  the 
time,  and,  on  the  mediation  of  the  King  of  France, 
a  truce  was  agreed  on.  It  was  of  no  long  duration, 
however,  each  side  accusing  the  other  of  breaking  it. 
But  such  was  the  disorder  of  King  Edward’s  realm, 
that  in  August  he  was  forced  to  reopen  negotiations 
for  peace.*  It  is  evident,  from  the  appointment  of 
Sir  John  de  Menteith  as  one  of  King  Robert’s  com¬ 
missioners,  that  one  of  the  staunchest  of  King  Ed¬ 
ward’s  Scottish  barons  had  deserted  his  cause. 

The  confusion  of  affairs  in  England  was  reflected 
in  the  frequent  changes  made  by  Edward  in  the 
Wardenship  of  Scotland.  The  Earl  of  Angus  and 
Sir  William  de  Ros  of  Hamelake  having  succeeded 
the  Earl  of  Richmond  as  joint  Wardens  on  June  21, 
1308,  Henry  de  Beaumont  was  added  as  a  third  on 
August  16,  1309;  but  four  days  later  separate  pat¬ 
ents  were  made  out  in  favour  of  Angus  and  Sir 
Robert  de  Clifford,  constituting  each  of  them  sole 
Guardian,  “because  the  King  was  uncertain  which 
of  them  would  accept  that  office.”f  Pending  their 


*  Bain,  iii. ,  19. 
f  Hailes,  ii.,  57. 


1313  A.  D.]  Campaigns  of  Edward  II. 


1 87 


decision,  Gilbert  de  Clare,  Earl  of  Gloucester,  was 
appointed  Captain-General  in  Scotland  (September 
14th)  ;  yet  on  October  6th  the  King  gave  instruc¬ 
tions  to  Sir  John  de  Segrave  as  Guardian  of  Scot¬ 
land.* * * §  Again,  on  December  20th,  de  Clifford  received 
his  commission  as  sole  Warden  until  Easter,  i3io,f 
when  de  Segrave  was  again  appointed,  April  10th, 
with  instructions  to  do  all  the  harm  he  can  to  the 
enemy.J 

Nothing  could  suit  Bruce’s  purpose  so  well  as  a 
hesitating  policy  on  the  part  of  England  ;  nothing 
else  could  have  saved  him  from  the  overwhelming 
superiority  in  resources  of  his  enemy.  As  matters 
turned  out,  the  King  of  Scots  was  able  to  enjoy 
some  repose  after  his  expedition  to  Argyll,  broken 
only  by  a  raid  into  Clydesdale,  when  he  laid  siege 
to  the  important  castle  of  Rutherglen.  This,  how¬ 
ever,  he  was  obliged  to  abandon  on  the  approach  of 
the  Earl  of  Gloucester. 

Lord  Hailes  thinks  it  probable  that  a  truce  was 
concluded  on  February  16,  1309;  but  it  must  have 
been  a  short  one,  for  in  September  King  Edward 
invaded  Scotland.  He  marched  by  a  new  and  some¬ 
what  hazardous  route,  by  way  of  Selkirk  (Septem¬ 
ber  2 1st),  St.  Boswells  (21st),  Roxburgh  (23d  to 
28th),  Biggar  (October  1st  to  14th),  Lanark  (15th), 
Renfrew  (15th),  Linlithgow  (23d  to  28th).  §  Bruce’s 
policy  was  to  avoid  an  encounter,  for  he  had  not 

*  Bain,  iii.,  19. 

f  Ibid.,  21. 

%  Ibid.,  21. 

§  Ibid. ,  32. 


1 88 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1307  /\D. 


forgotten  the  lessons  of  Falkirk  and  Dunbar.  He 
trusted  to  driving  away  all  cattle  and  other  supplies 
before  the  invaders,  and  so  rendering  it  impossible 
for  them  to  exist  in  what  had  become  practically  a 
desert.  Edward’s  spies  brought  him  news  that  the 
King  of  Scots  was  encamped  on  a  moor  near  Stir¬ 
ling,  but  the  English  were  unable  to  persevere,  and 
went  into  winter  quarters  at  Berwick. 

Negotiations  were  set  on  foot;  a  meeting  took 
place  at  Selkirk  before  Christmas  between  King 
Robert  and  Sir  Robert  de  Clifford  and  Sir  Robert 
Fitzpain,  and  a  further  interview  was  fixed,  to  be 
held  near  Melrose.  At  this  the  English  were  to 
have  been  represented  by  the  Earl  of  Gloucester, 
and  Piers  Gaveston,  Earl  of  Cornwall,  but  Bruce, 
being  warned  that  treachery  was  intended,  avoided 
the  meeting. 

Cornwall  was  now  Warden  north  of  the  Forth,  and 
remained  at  Perth  till  April,  13  n,  when  his  place  was 
taken  by  Sir  Henry  de  Percy.  King  Edward,  con¬ 
stantly  wrangling  with  his  barons,  lingered  at  Ber¬ 
wick  till  the  end  of  July,  when  he  went  reluctantly 
to  London  to  meet  the  Parliament  he  had  delayed 
so  long  to  summon.  He  left  behind  him  the  Bishop 
of  St.  Andrews,  to  conduct  negotiations  with  the 
King  of  Scots  as  opportunity  might  arise.*  When 
Parliament  met,  the  barons  showed  themselves  far 
more  deeply  incensed  against  the  Earl  of  Cornwall 
than  against  Robert  de  Brus.  Sentence  of  per¬ 
petual  exile  was  pronounced  on  the  detested  Gascon, 
and  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  threatened  with 


*  Bain,  iii.,  46. 


1313  A.D.]  Campaigns  of  Edward  II. 


189 


excommunication  all  who  henceforth  should  receive 
or  support  him.* 

Hardly  had  King  Edward  turned  his  back  on  the 
Border  before  his  vigilant  foe  assumed  the  offen¬ 
sive.  Crossing  the  Solway  on  August  12,  1311, 
Bruce  burnt  all  Gilsland,  Haltwistle,  and  a  great 
part  of  Tynedale,  and  returned  in  eight  days  with 
great  spoil  of  cattle.  But  even  the  chronicler  of 
Lanercost,  a  friar  of  Carlisle,  with  plenty  of  cause 
to  detest  the  Scots,  admits  that  Bruce  allowed  few 
men  to  be  slain,  except  those  who  resisted.  On 
September  8th,  King  Robert  was  over  the  Border 
again,  raiding  Reedsdale,  Harbottle,  Corbridge,  and 
all  that  country  for  the  space  of  fifteen  days  ;  but 
refraining  from  slaying  men,  or  burning  houses. f 
Northumberland  lay  at  his  mercy,  and  the  inhabi¬ 
tants  bought  a  truce,  to  last  till  February  2d  follow¬ 
ing,  at  the  price  of  £ 2000 . 

During  the  winter  of  1311-12  King  Edward  held 
his  Court  at  York;;):  nevertheless,  Bruce  raided  the 
Borders  on  the  expiry  of  the  truce,  and  exacted  fresh 
tribute  from  them,  taking  advantage  of  the  events 
which,  in  June,  culminated  in  the  execution  of  the 
Earl  of  Cornwall,  who  had  unwisely  returned  from 
exile. 

King  Robert  held  a  Parliament  at  Ayr  at  mid¬ 
summer,  and  then  sent  his  brother  to  harry  the 
English  Border.  Edward  de  Brus  succeeded  well  in 

*  Lanercost,  216. 

f  Ibid.,  217. 

\  Not  Berwick,  as  Hailes  read  it,  mistaking  Everwick,  the  old 
form  of  the  name  York,  for  that  of  the  Border  town. 


190 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1307  A. D.- 


this  expedition,  for,  having  burned  once  more  the 
oft-calcined  towns  of  Hexham  and  Corbridge,  he 
granted  a  truce  till  June  24,  1313,  on  payment  of 
£2000  in  cash  by  each  of  the  counties  of  Northum¬ 
berland,  Cumberland,  Westmorland,  and  Durham. 
Such  contributions  served  to  replenish  the  ex¬ 
chequer  of  the  King  of  Scots,  who  was  able  now  to 
turn  his  attention  to  reducing  strongholds  within 
his  own  realm. 

Access  to  the  public  records  has  made  it  possible 
to  supplement  and  amend  the  chronology  of  early 
writers,  and  at  the  same  time  to  verify  many  of  the 
details  given  by  them  of  this  period.  Barbour  is 
charitably  silent  about  an  unsuccessful  attempt  made 
by  Bruce  on  Berwick  castle,  on  the  night  of  De¬ 
cember  6,  1 3 1 1  ;  but  the  chronicler  of  Lanercost 
minutely  describes  the  rope-ladders,  which  he  him¬ 
self  had  seen,  used  by  the  Scots  in  their  assault. 
They  were,  he  says,  of  an  ingenious  and  novel  de¬ 
sign.  A  dog  barked  at  the  critical  moment  of  the 
escalade,  the  garrison  were  roused,  and  the  assailants 
made  off,  leaving  their  ladders  hanging. 

Forfar  was  probably  the  first  place  of  strength  to 
fall  into  the  hands  of  the  Scots — some  time  in  1312, 
and,  according  to  Bruce’s  invariable  practice,  the 
fortifications  were  immediately  destroyed.  Buittle, 
Dalswinton,  Caerlaverock,  and  perhaps  Lochmaben, 
commanding  the  valleys  of  the  Dee,  the  Nith,  and 
the  Annan,  followed  not  long  after,  surrendering  to 
Edward  de  Brus.  Perth,  a  far  stronger  place  than 
Forfar,  was  besieged  by  the  King  of  Scots  in  person. 
It  was  commanded  by  that  Sir  William  de  Oliphant 


1313  A. D.] 


Campaigns  of  Edward  II 


191 


who,  in  1304,  had  defended  Stirling  so  gallantly 
against  Edward  I.  Bruce  lay  before  it  for  six  weeks, 
and  then,  having  marked  the  shallowest  part  of  the 
moat,  made  a  feint  of  raising  the  siege,  and  marched 
away.  A  week  later,  on  January  8,  1313,  he  returned 
at  midnight,  and,  probing  the  way  with  his  spear, 
waded  through  the  water  as  high  as  his  throat.  The 
next  to  follow  was  a  French  knight,  who  was  amazed 
to  see  the  King  run  such  risks  to  win  “  ane  wrechit 
hamilet,”  and  then  came  the  escalading  party  with 
ladders.  The  garrison  kept  no  watch  ;  relying  on 
the  strength  of  their  defences,  they  and  the  towns¬ 
folk  woke  to  find  the  place  in  possession  of  the 
enemy.  Young  Malise  of  Strathearn  was  with  Bruce, 
but  his  father,  the  earl,  was  of  the  defending  force, 
and  was  made  prisoner.  The  King  gave  strict  orders 
against  unnecessary  slaughter,  seeing  that  the  garri¬ 
son  were  “kind  [akin]  to  the  cuntre,”  that  is,  that 
they  were  Scots,  though  in  English  pay.  But  his 
needy  followers  were  allowed  to  equip  themselves 
from  the  merchandise  found  in  the  town.* 

The  next  place  taken,  Dumfries,  was  one  of  great 
importance  to  the  defence  of  the  Western  Marches. 
This  castle  had  been  under  the  command  of  Sir 
Dougal  Macdouall  of  Galloway  since  1311.  He  had 
to  surrender  on  February  7,  1313,  owing  to 

failure  of  supplies,  for  which  he  had  often  written  in 
vain  to  the  keeper  of  stores  at  Carlisle,  by  reason 
of  which  many  of  his  garrison  had  deserted. f  The 

*  The  Brus ,  lxxi.  Barbour  erroneously  dates  the  fall  of  Perth 
and  other  places  before  the  King’s  expedition  to  Argyll  and  Lorn. 

f  Bain,  iii.,  56. 


ig2 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1307  A.D.- 


King  of  Scots  now  had  it  in  his  power  to  avenge  the 
blood  of  his  brothers,  whom  Macdouall  had  delivered 
to  the  gallows  at  Carlisle  in  1307;  but  he  showed  a 
magnanimous  forbearance,  and  Macdouall  continued 
in  the  service  of  England  till  his  death  in  1327.* 
Barbour  desciibes  the  capture  of  Linlithgow  cas¬ 
tle  as  taking  place  in  1309;  but  it  was  certainly 
in  the  hands  of  the  English  till  July  10,  13 13^ 
Sii  Peter  de  Luband  being  in  command  with  a 
mixed  garrison  of  English,  Scots,  and  Irish.f  As 
he  says  distinctly  that  the  assault  took  place  in 
harvest  time,  the  real  date  was,  in  all  likelihood,  Sep¬ 
tember,  1313.  This  time  the  poet  has  to  record  the 
valour,  not  of  some  high-born  knight,  but  of  a  simple 
countryman  called  Bunnock,  who  got  himself  hired 
by  the  garrison  to  cart  in  the  hay  they  had  cut  by 
the  lakeside.  Choosing  a  time  when  the  soldiers 
were  at  work  in  the  harvest-field,  he  placed  a  party 
in  ambush  near  the  castle.  He  then  concealed  eight 
armed  men  in  his  wain  under  the  hay,  gave  the  lad 
who  led  the  horses  a  sharp  axe  with  instructions 
how  to  use  it,  and  proceeded  to  the  castle  gate  with 
his  load.  The  porter  threw  all  wide  to  admit  the 
warn,  but  just  as  it  was  entering  the  gate,  Bunnock 
turned  the  horses’  heads  so  that  it  stuck  fast  in  the 
gangway.  At  the  same  moment,  the  lad  cut  the 

*  Bain,  11.,  171.  In  estimating  Bruce’s  magnanimity,  it  should  be 
remembered  that  the  ransom  of  a  knight  such  as  Macdouall  was  a 
consideration  of  moment,  if  not  to  the  King  himself,  who  perhaps 

was  not  present  at  the  taking  of  Dumfries,  at  all  events  to  Mac¬ 
douall  s  captor. 

\Ibid.,  41 1,  412. 


CLACKMANNAN  CASTLE,  THE  RESIDENCE  OF  ROBERT,  IN  1314. 

C From  a  photograph  by  Vale7itine  Bros.,  Dundee. ) 


1313  A. d.]  Campaigns  of  Edward  II 


193 


ropes  of  the  drawbridge,  so  that  it  could  not  be  raised, 
the  eight  fellows  sprang  from  under  the  hay,  slew  the 
unhappy  porter,  overpowered  the  few  men  left  in  the 
castle,  and  the  ambush  running  up  made  all  secure 
before  the  return  of  the  party  from  the  harvest. 
And  thus  the  important  “pele”of  Linlithgow  was 
won.  From  the  muster  rolls  that  year  it  appears 
that  the  garrison  included  88  horse  besides  a  con¬ 
siderable  number  of  foot  soldiers.* 

On  the  expiry  of  the  truce  with  the  northern  Eng¬ 
lish  counties  on  June  24th,  of  this  year,  Bruce  threat¬ 
ened  another  descent  upon  them  ;  whereupon,  de¬ 
spairing  of  any  succour  from  their  own  King,  they 
once  more  paid  a  heavy  tribute  as  the  price  of  an  ex¬ 
tension  till  September  29,  1 3 1 4.^  Great  events  were 
to  take  place  before  that  date  came  round, 

At  this  time  it  is  believed  that  King  Robert  resided 
chiefly  at  Clackmannan  castle,  within  easy  reach  of 
Stirling. 

*  Bain,  iii.,  423. 
f  Lancrcost,  222. 

x3 


4 


Sir  Gilbert  de  Clare, 
Earl  of  Gloucester. 


Sir  Giles  de  Argentine. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  BATTLE  OF  BANNOCKBURN. 

A.D.  1314. 

THE  year  1314  proved  a  memorable  one  for  the 
fortunes  of  the  King  of  Scots  and  his  people. 
It  opened  with  the  capture  of  Roxburgh 
Castle  by  Sir  James  Douglas  on  Shrove  Tuesday, 
March  6th,  when  the  garrison  were  occupied  with  the 
usual  merry-making  on  the  eve  of  Lent.  Douglas 
picked  sixty  men  and  made  them  cover  their  armour 
with  black  “froggis,”  and  approach  the  castle  on 
all  fours,  so  that  in  the  dusk  they  might  be  mistaken 
for  cattle  in  the  meadows.  A  craftsman  called  Sym 
of  the  Ledous  (Leadhouse)  had  prepared  rope  lad¬ 
ders  with  hooks  to  fling  over  the  battlements,  and 
was  himself  the  first  to  scale  the  wall,  slaying  the 
sentinel  who  was  aroused  by  the  noise.  Another  man 
running  up  shared  the  same  fate.  Then  Douglas 
and  his  men  climbed  up  without  further  hindrance, 
and,  forming  up  in  the  courtyard,  burst  into  the 
great  hall  where  the  people  were  dancing,  with  loud 

194 


1314  A.D.3  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn. 


*95 


shouts  of  “  Douglas  !  Douglas  !”  The  governor,  Sir 
William  de  Fiennes,  a  knight  of  Gascony,  was  in  the 
keep,  and  held  it  all  the  next  day ;  but  having  been 
severely  wounded  in  the  face,  he  surrendered  on 
condition  of  being  allowed  to  march  out  with  the 
honours  of  war  and  pass  into  England.  He  died 
of  his  wound  not  long  afterwards.  The  loss  of  this 
castle  was  a  serious  one  to  England,  for  it  command¬ 
ed  Teviotdale  and  upper  Tweeddale ;  but  Bruce,  as 
usual,  “tumlit”  it  to  the  ground. 

The  King’s  sister,  Maria  de  Brus,  who  had  been 
imprisoned  in  Roxburgh  Castle  in  1306,  was  no  lon¬ 
ger  there  when  it  was  taken.  Edward  II.  had  signed 
a  warrant  for  her  exchange  for  Walter  Comyn  in 
March,  1310,  and  another  in  February,  1312,  for  her 
exchange  for  Sir  Richard  de  Moubray,  but  neither 
transaction  had  been  carried  into  effect,  for  she  was 
still  in  prison  at  Newcastle  in  November,  1313.* 

During  this  same  season  of  Lent,  Thomas  Ran¬ 
dolph,  having  made  peace  with  his  uncle  King  Rob¬ 
ert,  was  blockading  Edinburgh  Castle.  One  William 
Frangois  told  him  of  a  place  on  the  north  wall, 
where,  while  living  as  a  youth  with  his  father  in  the 
castle,  he  used  to  find  his  way  out  at  night  to  visit 
a  girl  in  the  town.  All  that  was  wanted  at  this  point 
was  a  ladder  twelve  feet  long,  to  give  access  over  the 
wall  from  the  top  of  a  pathway  up  the  crags.  Up 
this  path  Frangois  guided  Randolph,  Sir  Andrew 
Gray,  and  a  picked  band  ;  it  is  prettily  told  by  Bar¬ 
bour  how  they  managed  the  perilous  ascent ;  how 


*Bain,  iii.,  66. 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1314  A.D. 


they  lay  close  under  the  wall  while  sentries  were  be¬ 
ing  relieved  ;  how  a  sentry  flung  a  stone  over  their 
heads,  crying,  “  Away  !  I  can  see  you,”  though  he  saw 
nothing;  and  how,  in  the  end,  they  scaled  the  wall, 
surprised  the  garrison,  slew  Sir  Peter  de  Lubaud,  the 
governor,  and  got  possession  of  the  castle.*  But  he 
does  not  mention  what  the  chronicler  of  Lanercost, 
being  informed  from  English  sources,  relates,  that 
simultaneously  with  the  escalade  on  the  north  side, 
an  attack  was  delivered  on  the  south  (it  must  have 
been  on  the  west,  and  a  feint),  whereby  the  attention 
of  the  defenders  was  withdrawn  from  the  real  point 
of  danger.f 

The  exact  date  of  the  capture  or  surrender  of 
Dundee,  held  by  Sir  Alexander  de  Abernethy  with 
a  strong  garrison,  has  not  been  ascertained ;  nor 
that  of  the  taking  of  Rutherglen.  But  both  of 
these  strongholds  fell  into  the  hands  of  Edward  de 
Brus  ;  and,  by  the  spring  of  1314,  the  only  import¬ 
ant  fortresses  held  by  the  English  in  Scotland  were 
those  of  Berwick,  Stirling,  Bothwell,  and  possibly 
Lochmaben. 

The  warmest  partisan  in  the  Scottish  cause  can¬ 
not  but  feel  some  pity  for  the  English  commanders 
and  soldiers,  left  as  they  were  at  this  time  without 
support  or  encouragement  from  their  own  King,  in 
the  presence  of  an  enemy  daily  growing  in  strength. 
Garrison  after  garrison  was  obliged  to  yield  to  the 
force  of  numbers  or  stress  of  starvation.  But  a 


*  The  Brus ,  lxxxiv, 
f  Lanercost .  2% 


STIRLING  CASTLE  FROM  THE  SOUTH-WEST. 

C From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros.,  Dundee .) 


1314  a.d.]  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn. 


T9  7 


still  darker  disaster  was  approaching — a  deeper 
humiliation  for  the  proud  chivalry  of  England.  • 

Edward  de  Brus  had  laid  siege  to  Stirling  Castle 
in  Lent,  1313,  and  it  remained  closely  invested  till 
midsummer.  The  governor,  Sir  Philip  de  Moubray, 
then  obtained  from  Edward  de  Brus  consent  to  a 
suspension  of  hostilities,  on  condition  that  he,  Sir 
Philip,  would  surrender,  if  he  were  not  relieved 
before  Midsummer  Day,  1314.  When  King  Robert 
heard  of  this  he  was  greatly  displeased.  He  knew 
that  if  anything  would  put  the  chivalry  of  England 
on  its  mettle,  and  reconcile  the  barons  with  their 
incompetent  King,  it  would  be  this  summons  to  the 
rescue  of  a  brother  knight — this  fixing  a  distant  day 
for  a  supreme  effort.  He  ever  saw  that  his  best 
chance  lay  in  avoiding  a  general  action,  and  in  carry¬ 
ing  on  an  irregular  and  profitable  warfare  on  the 
Border,  while  the  English  Government  continued 
distracted  by  civil  discord.  However,  the  mistake 
had  been  made  :  Edward  de  Brus’s  knightly  word 
had  been  pledged,  and  the  King  of  Scots  was  not 
the  man  to  recoil  from  the  consequences. 

Matters  turned  out  exactly  as  Robert  had  fore¬ 
seen.  The  King  of  England  set  about  making  im¬ 
mense  preparations,  and,  Piers  Gaveston  having 
expiated  his  offences  on  the  scaffold,  the  barons 
responded  heartily  to  the  summons  to  arms.  The 
Earl  of  Lancaster,  however,  with  his  adherents 
Warwick,  Warenne,  and  Arundel,  remained  at  home, 
being  dissatisfied  because  of  Edward’s  failure  to 
fulfil  certain  pledges  made  to  them.*  Writs  were 


*  Lanercost ,  224. 


198 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1314  A.D. 


issued  for  the  muster  at  Wark,  on  June  11,  1314, 
of  21,540  foot,  drawn  from  twelve  of  the  midland 
and  northern  counties  of  England.  Eth  O’Connor, 
Celtic  chief  of  Connaught,  was  invoked  as  an  auxil¬ 
iary,  and  King  Edward’s  subjects  in  Ireland  and 
Wales  were  summoned  to  his  standard.  Besides 
these  there  were  contingents  of  Gascons  and  other 
foreign  troops.  The  English  bishops  offered  an 
indulgence  of  forty  days  to  all  who  would  offer 
prayer  for  the  success  of  the  expedition. 

Lord  Hailes  sharply  takes  exception  to  Hume’s 
opinion  that  the  alleged  total  of  100,000  as  the 
strength  of  the  English  army  was  an  over-estimate ; 
but  there  is,  in  truth,  nothing  to  show  that  it 
approached  that  figure.  Barbour,  indeed,  asserts 
that  the  host  exceeded  100,000,  but  he  puts  the 
cavalry  alone  at  the  exorbitant  cypher  of  40,000, 
a  number  which  it  would  have  been  utterly  impossi¬ 
ble  to  maintain  in  a  country  where  agriculture  had 
suffered  from  years  of  desolating  war.  It  is  true 
that  the  English  fleet  co-operated  with  the  army, 
but  it  would  have  plenty  to  do  in  landing  supplies 
for  50,000,  which  is  the  most  liberal  estimate  of 
the  total  strength  of  all  arms  that  can  be  founded 
on  the  evidence  of  the  Patent  Rolls.*  Even  this 
would  be  a  very  powerful  army,  far  outnumbering 
any  that  the  King  of  Scots  could  put  in  the  field 
against  it. 

The  official  evidence  still  extant  of  the  force  of 
the  English  in  this  campaign,  is  wholly  wanting  as 


*Bain,  iii.,  Introduction,  xxi. 


1314  A. D.]  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn.  199 

regards  the  strength  of  the  Scottish  host.  Barbour 
puts  it  at  30,000,  but  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that 
Bruce  had  anything  like  that  number  under  arms. 
Admitting,  as  nearly  all  authorities  agree  to  do, 
that  the  English  army  bore  to  the  Scottish  the  pro¬ 
portion  of  three  to  one,  it  seems  reasonable  to  put 
the  latter  at  20,000  at  most.  Both  hosts,  no  doubt, 
were  followed  by  a  huge  swarm  of  “  pitaille  ” — 
camp-followers  and  rascals  of  all  sorts,  who  always 
gathered  in  the  wake  of  mediaeval  war. 

As  St.  John’s  day — June  24th — drew  near,  on 
which  it  had  been  appointed  that  the  destinies  of 
the  two  nations  were  to  be  decided,  the  King  of 
Scots  encamped  with  all  his  forces  in  the  Torwood, 
between  Falkirk  of  gloomy  memories  and  Stirling 
of  happier  associations.  In  the  presence  of  the 
overwhelming  odds  brought  against  him,  it  must 
have  taxed  even  his  stout  spirit  and  well-proved 
courage  to  keep  foreboding  at  bay,  when  he  remem¬ 
bered  the  result  of  the  last  great  trial  of  strength 
between  the  hosts  of  England  and  Scotland — the 
overthrow  of  Wallace  at  Falkirk.  Every  advantage 
gained  since  the  death  of  the  mighty  Edward,  the 
future  of  his  country,  and  his  own  fate — all  were  to 
be  put  to  the  hazard  of  a  contest  between  two 
vastly  unequal  armies.  But  his  nerve  never  forsook 
him.  There  were  other  memories  for  the  King- 

O 

besides  those  of  Falkirk  and  Dunbar.  Stirling 
Bridge,  Loudon  Hill,  Glentrool — each  had  taught 
the  same  lesson,  namely,  that  military  skill  in  the 
choice  and  preparation  of  position  might,  and  often 
did,  prevail  against  superiority  of  numbers  and 


200 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1314  A.D. 


equipment.  To  this  task  he  devoted  himself,  and 
no  one  can  appreciate  the  sagacity  with  which  he 
accomplished  it,  without  going  carefully  over  the 
ground  which  he  chose.  But  besides  the  technical 
part  of  his  office  as  commander-in-chief,  there  was 
the  hardly  less  important  duty  of  rousing  the  spirit 
and  patriotic  ardour  of  his  soldiers.  None  under¬ 
stood  better  than  the  Bruce  how  this  was  to  be  done. 
He  went  incessantly  among  his  troops,  advising  and 
encouraging  them,  and  personally  superintended  the 
execution  of  the  works  he  ordered  to  be  done. 
Nor  did  he  neglect  the  aid  of  religion  ;  for,  doubly 
excommunicate  though  he  was,  he  directed  the 
vigil  of  St.  John  (Sunday,  June  23d)  to  be  kept  as 
a  solemn  fast. 

News  was  brought  by  scouts  on  Saturday,  June 
22d,that  the  English  army  had  lain  overnight  at  Edin¬ 
burgh,*  and  was  advancing  by  way  of  Falkirk.  Upon 
this  King  Robert  moved  out  upon  the  position  which 
he  had  already  chosen  with  great  care,  on  some  gently 
swelling  hills,  about  two  miles  south  of  Stirling,  with 
his  front  facing  south  by  east.  The  English  had  the 
alternative  of  two  lines  of  advance — by  the  old 
Roman  highway,  leading  through  the  village  of  St. 
Ninians,  or  farther  to  the  east,  by  the  “  carse  ”  or 
plain  beside  the  river  Forth,  across  patches  of  culti¬ 
vation  and  shallow  pools  of  water.  The  King  of 
Scots  was  prepared  to  oppose  them  whichever  way 
they  came,  and,  with  great  prudence,  refrained  from 


*  Edinburgh  Castle  had  been  dismantled  after  its  capture  by  Ran¬ 
dolph  the  previous  summer. —  The  Brus ,  lxxxv.,  17  ;  Lanercost,  223. 


1314  a.d.]  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn. 


201 


taking  up  his  ground  until  the  enemy  was  committed 
to  one  of  these  two  lines.  Had  the  English  come 
by  the  carse,  Bruce  would  have  met  them  at  a  point 
where  the  Forth  makes  a  bend  and  considerably  nar¬ 
rows  the  level  ground.  Here  the  enemy  would  have 
been  compelled  greatly  to  reduce  his  front,  thereby 
sacrificing  his  great  advantage  in  numbers,  especially 
for  the  operations  of  cavalry,  an  arm  in  which  he  was 
unusually  strong. 

As  soon  as  it  was  evident  that  King  Edward  had 
chosen  the  upper  route,  through  St.  Ninians,  Bruce 
took  up  the  ground  he  had  chosen  to  meet  that  con¬ 
tingency.  This  was  in  the  park,  where,  from  almost 
immemorial  time,  game  had  been  preserved  for  the 
hunting  of  the  Scottish  kings.  His  army  was  in  four 
divisions  ;  the  right  being  under  command  of  Ed¬ 
ward  de  Brus,  the  second  under  Randolph,  Earl  of 
Moray,  and  the  third,  on  the  left  of  the  line,  under 
Walter  the  Steward  and  Douglas  ;  while  the  King 
himself  held  the  fourth  division  in  reserve.  In  front 
of  the  Scottish  position  flowed  the  Bannock  burn, 
which,  in  summer,  is  but  an  insignificant  brook. 
But  the  quick  eye  of  Bruce  had  discerned  its  impor¬ 
tance  to  his  position.  For  less  than  a  mile,  between 
Parkmill  on  the  west  and  Beaton’s  mill  *  on  the  east, 
the  stream  runs  nearly  level  with  its  banks,  affording 
no  difficulty  either  to  horseman  or  foot  soldier  in 
fording  it.  Beyond  these  points,  however,  the  banks 
are  precipitous,  and  practically  impassable  by  cavalry. 


*  This  is  the  mill  where  James  III.  was  murdered  in  his  flight 
from  the  battle  of  Sauchieburn,  in  1488. 


202 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1314  A.D. 


Edward’s  advance,  therefore,  had  to  be  directed  be¬ 
tween  these  two  points,  and  the  front  of  his  vast 
array  reduced  to  a  corresponding  extent. 

But  this  was  very  far  from  all.  Besides  the  Ban¬ 
nock,  in  itself  a  trifling  obstacle,  there  were  two  bogs, 
skirting  each  side  of  the  ancient  causeway  along 
which  Edward  had  to  move.  One  of  these,  now  called 
Halbert’s  Bog,  extended  from  New  Park,  at  a  point 
opposite  Charters  Hall  Mains,  to  the  foot  of  Brock’s 
Brae  ;  the  other  called  Milton  Bog,  stretched  from 
a  point  close  to  the  causeway  down  to  where  the 
banks  of  the  Bannock  rise  into  wooded  cliffs.  These 
bogs  lay  on  the  north  bank  of  the  Bannock,  and  there¬ 
fore  between  the  Scots  and  the  stream.  They  covered 
nearly  the  whole  Scottish  front  ;  but  there  was  a 
piece  of  hard  land  extending  along  both  banks 
westward  from  Charters  Hall  to  Parkmill,  though  this 
ground,  being  thickly  wooded,  was  less  favourable  for 
the  operations  of  cavalry.  Practically  it  came  to  this, 
that  the  English,  in  order  to  cross  the  Bannock  and 
attack  the  Scottish  position,  would  have  to  advance 
in  two  columns  :  one  with  a  front  reduced  sufficiently 
to  pass  between  the  two  bogs  ;  the  other  with  a  front 
of  some  two  hundred  yards  to  operate  in  the  fringe 
of  the  Torwood,  on  the  ground  between  Charters 
Hall  and  Parkmill. 

Even  this  great  disadvantage  was  not  enough  to 
satisfy  the  King  of  Scots.  He  directed  and  person¬ 
ally  superintended  the  construction  of  elaborate  de¬ 
fences  against  cavalry — the  arm  in  which  he  felt  most 
inferior  to  the  English.  He  caused  the  ground  be¬ 
tween  the  two  bogs,  and  also  the  hard  land  opposite 


1314  a.d.i  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn . 


203 


the  right  of  his  line,  to  be  honeycombed  with  a 
multitude  of  round  holes,  measuring  a  foot  in  diame¬ 
ter  and  as  deep  as  a  man’s  knee,  which  were  then 
covered  with  sods  resting  on  small  sticks.* 

On  Sunday  morning,  J une  23d,  at  sunrise,  mass  was 
celebrated  in  the  Scottish  camp.  It  was  nearly  noon  f 
when  tidings  came  of  the  approach  of  the  English 
army  from  Falkirk,  where  they  had  lain  the  night 
before.  Barbour  says  they  marched  in  ten  divisions 
of  10,000  each;  the  chronicler  of  Lanercost  mentions 
eleven  principal  commanders,  namely,  the  Earls  of 
Gloucester,  Hereford,  Pembroke,  and  Angus ;  Sir 
Robert  de  Clifford,  Sir  John  Comyn  (son  of  the  Red 
Comyn),  Sir  Henry  de  Beaumont,  Sir  John  de  Se- 
grave,  Sir  Pagan  de  Typtoft,  Sir  Edmund  de  Maul 
and  Sir  Ingelram  de  Umfraville.  The  King  of  Scots 
called  upon  any  of  his  men  who.  feared  the  com¬ 
ing  battle  to  depart  at  once,  but  not  a  man  left  the 
ranks. 

The  English  vanguard  came  in  sight  on  the  rising 
ground  near  Plean.  The  main  body,  it  seems,  had 
been  halted,  in  order  that  a  council  of  war  might  be 
held,  to  discuss  whether  the  attack  should  be  made 
at  once  or  deferred  till  the  morrow.  The  weather 
was  intensely  hot;;);  perhaps  the  troops  were  ex¬ 
hausted  by  their  march  from  Falkirk,  although  that 
place  lies  only  nine  miles  south  from  Bannockburn. 


*  Buchanan  describes  calthrops—  iron  spikes  for  laming  horses — as 
having  been  scattered  over  the  ground,  but  these  are  not  mentioned 
by  earlier  writers. 

f  Post-prandium. — Lanercost ,  225. 

\  The  Brus}  xciv.,  115. 


204  Robert  the  Bruce .  [1314  a.d, 

It  was  decided,  apparently  unwisely,  to  bivouack  in 
the  carse  near  the  river,  vn  mauueis  parfoundrnscelle 
marras ,*  so  that  men  and  horses  might  be  fresh  for 
their  work  on  the  next  day.  Sir  Thomas  Gray, 
whose  account  of  the  battle  differs  in  some  respects 
from  all  others,  and  who,  writing  as  a  soldier  and 
the  son  of  a  knight  who  was  present,  is  deserving  of 
special  consideration,  seems  to  attribute  the  delay  to 
the  advice  of  Sir  Philip  de  Moubray,  governor  of 
Stirling,  who  had  ridden  out  to  meet  King  Edward. 
This  knight  warned  the  English  generals  how  the 
Scots  had  raised  obstructions  in  the  passes  of  the 
woods  (anoint  fowez  lez  estroitz  chemyns  du  boys),  and 
said  that  it  was  not  necessary  for  them  to  advance 
farther,  for  that  the  conditions  of  the  relief  of  Stir¬ 
ling  had  been  fulfilled  by  an  English  army  coming 
within  three  miles  of  that  town. 

The  vanguard,  however,  pressed  on,  whether  be¬ 
cause  the  Earl  of  Gloucester  was  not  informed  of  the 
halt,  or  because  his  young  knights  were  eager  for  a 
brush  with  the  enemy,  f 

There  is  some  discrepancy  in  the  order  given  by 
various  writers  to  the  events  which  immediately  fol¬ 
lowed,  and  I  have  chosen  to  follow  chiefly  the  narra¬ 
tive  of  Sir  Thomas  Gray,  though  other  historians 
have  generally  adopted  the  accounts  of  monkish,  and 
therefore  inexpert,  authorities.  But  Barbour’s  per¬ 
sonal  descriptions  maybe  relied  on  with  considerable 
confidence. 

*  Scalacronica ,  142. 

f  Lez  ioenes  gentz  ne  aresterent  my  tindrent  lour  chemyns. — Scala- 
ironic  a,  141. 


1314  a.d.]  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn .  205 

The  King  of  Scots  rode  up  and  down  his  lines 
mounted  on  a  palfrey — 

“  ane  gay  palfray 
Litill  and  joly.” 

He  carried  a  battle-axe  in  his  hand  ;  on  his  head  he 
wore  a  basnet  covered  with  cuir  bouilli,  or  “  cor- 
buyle  ”  *  as  soldiers  called  it,  surmounted  by  the 
royal  crown.  In  the  best  manner  of  chivalry  Sir 
Henry  de  Bohun,  the  Earl  of  Hereford’s  nephew, 
rode  out  alone  from  the  English  ranks,  to  challenge 
a  Scottish  champion  to  single  combat.  He  was 
mounted  on  a  powerful  destrier  and  armed  at  all 
points  ;  a  shudder  must  have  run  through  the  Scot¬ 
tish  battalions  when  the  King  himself  spurred  for¬ 
ward  on  his  hackney  to  take  up  the  challenge.  The 
encounter  was  as  brief  as  it  was  decisive.  De  Bohun, 
lance  in  rest,  charged  the  King,  whose  pony  nimbly 
avoided  the  shock.  Bruce,  rising  in  his  stirrups, 
smote  the  English  knight  on  the  helmet  as  he  passed, 
with  such  violence  that  the  axe  clove  his  head  from 
the  crown  to  the  chin.  The  axe  shaft  broke,  and 
the  force  of  the  blow  carried  Bruce  forward,  so  that 
he  fell  from  his  saddle  flat  on  the  ground. 

What  tremendous  issues  depended  at  that  mo¬ 
ment  on  the  nerve  and  skill  of  a  single  mortal !  The 
whole  future  history  of  Great  Britain,  involving  the 
existence  of  dynasties  and  the  welfare  of  millions, 
was  staked  on  the  fibre  of  one  arm  and  the  coolness 
of  one  head.  For  the  effect  of  such  an  episode  on 


*  Corbuyle ,  leather  greatly  thickened  and  hardened :  jacked 
leather. — Jamieson's  Dictionary. 


206  Robert  the  Bruce.  [1314  a.d. 

the  minds  of  superstitious  soldiers  cannot  be  over¬ 
estimated,  happening  as  it  did  on  the  eve  of  a  pitched 
battle,  for  which  a  whole  year  had  been  spent  in 
preparation.  It  is  easy  to  believe  that,  as  Barbour 
describes,  Bruce’s  barons  hotly  remonstrated  with 
him  for  having  risked  so  much  and  imperilled  a  life 
of  such  supreme  value  ;  but  it  is  equally  easy  to 
imagine  to  what  pitch  of  confidence  and  enthusiasm 
the  Scottish  soldiers  were  raised,  by  this  display  of 
personal  courage  and  feat  of  arms,  enacted  on  that 
bright  summer  noon,  in  plain  view  of  the  English 
and  Scottish  troops.  It  is  said  that  King  Robert 
met  the  reproaches  of  his  barons  by  observing  that 
it  was  indeed  a  pity  he  had  broken  his  good  battle- 
axe. 

While  Gloucester  menaced  the  front  of  the  Scot¬ 
tish  position,  he  detached  300  English  men-at-arms 
under  Sir  Robert  de  Clifford,*  to  circle  round  the 
left  of  their  line  and,  by  keeping  the  low  ground 
near  the  Forth,  to  establish  communications  with 
the  garrison  of  Stirling.  Bruce,  with  the  true  in¬ 
stinct  of  a  soldier,  had  foreseen  some  such  move¬ 
ment,  and  had  given  strict  orders  to  Randolph  to  be 
on  his  guard  to  intercept  it.  The  exact  position 
occupied  by  Randolph  on  this  day  has  been  the  sub¬ 
ject  of  much  uncertainty.  It  would  seem  more 
natural  that  the  duty  of  watching  the  approach  to 
Stirling  by  the  carse  should  have  been  entrusted  to 
Douglas  and  the  Steward,  commanding  the  left  divi- 

*  Hailes  endorses  Barbour’s  figure  of  800,  but  Sir  Thomas  Gray, 
whose  father  rode  with  de  Clifford,  mentions  only  300.—  Sea  fa* 
cronica,  141. 


1314  A.D.]  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn. 


207 


sion  in  the  line,  and  therefore  nearest  to  the  carse. 
But  the  left  division  lay  on  lower  ground  than  the 
others,  and  Randolph  was  probably  stationed  on 
Coxet  Hill,  slightly  in  rear  of  the  general  line,  while 
the  King  held  a  position  rather  in  advance,  on  the 
Borestone  Hill.*  From  the  last-named  elevation  a 
view  can  be  had  of  the  carse  down  a  hollow  in  the 
ground,  and,  looking  down  this,  Bruce  suddenly  per¬ 
ceived  what  trees  and  rising  ground  concealed  from 
Randolph  on  Coxet  Hill,  namely,  a  body  of  English 
cavalry  passing  northward  beyond  the  left  flank  of 
the  Scots. 

Instantly  the  King  sent  a  sharp  reproach  to  his 
nephew,  Randolph,  telling  him  that  he  had  “  let  fall 
a  rose  from  his  chaplet,”  and  bidding  him  keep  bet¬ 
ter  watch.  Randolph,  stung  by  the  taunt,  proceeded 
to  execute  a  manoeuvre  which  it  would  be  impossible 
to  understand  without  Gray’s  explanation  of  it.  It 
has  generally  been  supposed  that  Randolph  set  out 
with  cavalry  to  overtake  de  Clifford  ;  and  certainly 
it  would  have  been  a  hopeless  task  to  intercept  the 
English  horse  with  foot-soldiers.  But  in  the  whole 
Scottish  army  there  were  but  500  cavalry,  under  the 
command  of  Sir  Robert  de  Keith,  and  these  took  no 
part  in  the  fighting  on  Sunday.  The  true  explana¬ 
tion  is  to  be  found  in  the  eagerness  of  the  English 
knights.  De  Clifford  and  de  Beaumont  were  mak- 


*  The  perforated  stone,  whence  this  hill  takes  its  name,  is  said  to 
have  supported  the  royal  standard  during  the  battle.  Most  likely  it 
did  so  on  the  Saturday  and  Sunday,  for  the  hill  is  a  fine  post  of  ob¬ 
servation  ;  but,  as  will  be  shown,  the  position  was  somewhat  altered 
before  the  general  engagement. 


208 


[1314  A.D. 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


in g  good  progress  through  the  plain  between  Old 
Polmaise  and  Livilands,  and,  believing  that  they  had 
escaped  observation,  saw  the  way  clear  before  them 
into  Stirling.  Suddenly  they  observed  Randolph 
leaving  the  wood  and  moving  parallel  to  them  on 
the  higher  ground  to  their  left,  apparently  with  his 
whole  division  (issist  du  boys  od  sa  batail). 

“  Wait  a  little  !  ”  cried  Sir  Henry  de  Beaumont, 
“  let  them  come  on  ;  let  them  out  on  the  plain.” 

“Sir,”  said  Sir  Thomas  Gray,  “  I  doubt  they  are 
too  many  for  us.” 

“  Look  you  !  ”  retorted  de  Beaumont,  “  if  you  are 
afraid  you  can  retreat.” 

“  Sir !  ”  answered  Gray,  indignantly,  “  it  is  not  for 
fear  that  I  shall  retire  this  day  ”  (Sire  !  pur  pour  ne 

fuer ay  ieo  huy). 

With  these  words  he  ranged  his  horse  between  de 
Beaumont  and  Sir  William  d’Eyncourt,  and  charged 
the  Scots.  Randolph  received  the  heavy  cavalry 
in  the  usual  formation  of  a  dense  oval  or  square, 
each  front  rank  man  having  the  butt  of  his  pike 
firmly  planted  in  the  ground  between  his  knees. 
Charge  after  charge  recoiled  from  the  hedge  of  steel. 
D’Eyncourt  fell  dead  at  the  first  onslaught;  Sir 
Thomas  Gray’s  horse  was  impaled  on  the  pikes, 
and  the  rider  taken  prisoner.  His  son  observes,  in  his 
sorrowful  narrative,  that  the  Scots  had  learnt  how  to 
fight  on  foot  from  the  Flemings,  who  in  that  manner 
had  discomfited  the  chivalry  of  France  at  Courtray. 

When  Douglas  saw  the  gallant  young  Randolph 
leave  the  shelter  of  the  wood  for  the  open  field,  he 
feared  for  the  advantage  that  manoeuvre  would  give 


1314  a.d.]  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn. 


209 


the  heavy  cavalry,  and  he  implored  the  King  to  let 
him  go  to  the  rescue.  Bruce  wisely  refused  to  de¬ 
range  his  order  of  battle  in  presence  of  the  enemy, 
and  forbade  him  to  leave  his  ground.  But  whether,  as 
Barbour  alleges,  the  King  in  the  end  gave  a  reluctant 
consent,  or  whether,  as  is  more  likely,  Douglas  took 
matters  into  his  own  hands,  he  led  a  force  to  support 
Randolph.  But  the  work  had  heen  done  before  he 
could  arrive.  De  Clifford’s  men  had  suffered  severe¬ 
ly  in  repeated  repulses,  and  were  fallen  into  great 
disorder,  while  the  Scots  still  showed  an  unbroken 
front — “  as  ane  hyrcheoun” — like  a  hedgehog.  Dou¬ 
glas,  unwilling  to  deprive  a  young  soldier  of  credit 
in  this  affair,  halted  his  men  ;  and  the  English,  find¬ 
ing  themselves  in  the  presence  of  fresh  troops,  took 
to  flight,  some  to  Stirling  Castle,  others  back  the 
way  they  came. 

This  conflict  took  place  on  a  piece. of  ground  which 
is  still  called  Randolph’s  Field,  at  the  south  end  of 
Melville  Terrace,  Stirling.  Two  large  stones,  about 
a  hundred  yards  to  the  west  of  the  present  high 
road,  mark  the  spot  where  the  Scottish  square  re¬ 
ceived  De  Clifford’s  charge. 

After  the  double  reverse  thus  inflicted  on  his  arms, 
Gloucester,  finding  that  he  was  not  supported  by  the 
main  body  of  English,  abandoned  the  attack  and  re¬ 
treated  to  Edward’s  bivouacking  ground. 

The  speeches  which  chroniclers  are  wont  to  put  in 
the  mouths  of  their  heroes  are  not  worthy  of  much 
credence.  No  doubt  Bruce  did  address  his  leaders 
on  the  eve  of  battle,  and  perhaps  to  much  the  same 
effect  as  Barbour  professes  to  report  verbatim,  and 


14 


2  10 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1314  A.D. 


as,  in  later  days,  it  was  paraphrased  in  the  stirring 
verse  of  Burns.  But  for  historical  purposes  it  would 
be  as  idle  to  dwell  on  what  were  supposed  to  be  his 
actual  words,  as  to  accept  as  authentic  the  miracle  of 
St.  Fillan’s  arm,  recorded  by  Boece,  though  on  this 
subject  Barbour  is  prudently  silent.  It  is  not,  how¬ 
ever  improbable  that  the  King  of  Scots  did,  as  was  re¬ 
ported,  cause  this  sacred  relic  to  be  brought  from  the 
priory  of  Strathfillan,  its  shrine  in  Perthshire,  into  his 
camp,  trusting  to  its  influence,  if  not  on  the  fortune 
of  war  at  least  on  the  imagination  of  his  soldiers. 
The  fable  may  be  repeated  here  from  Bellenden’s 
translation  of  Boece,  as  an  example  of  the  myths 
which  have  their  birth  in  ages  when  the  border 
between  faith  and  superstition  is  ill-defined. 


“  All  the  nicht  afore  the  batall,  K.  Robert  was  right  wery,  havand 
gret  solicitude  for  the  weil  of  his  army,  and  micht  tak  na  rest,  but 
rolland  * * * §  all  jeoperdeis  and  chance  of  fortoun  in  his  mind  ;  and  sum 
times  he  went  to  his  devoit  contemplatioun,  makand  his  orisoun 
to  Sanct  Phillane,  quhais  j-  arme,  as  he  believit,  set  in  silver,  was 
closit  in  ane  cais  within  his  palyeon  \  :  traisting  the  better  fortoun  to, 
follow  be  the  samin.g  In  the  mene  time,  the  cais  chakkit  to  ||  sud- 
danlie,  but  **  ony  motion  or  werk  of  mortall  creaturis.  The  preist, 
astonist  be  this  wounder,  went  to  the  altar  quhair  ff  the  cais  lay  ; 
and  quhen  he  fand  the  arme  in  the  cais,  he  cryit,  ‘  Heir  is  ane  gret 
mirakle  !  ’  and  incontinent  he  confessit  how  he  brocht  the  tume  it 
cais  in  the  feild,  dredaned  §§  that  therellik  suld  be  tint  |||j  in  the  feild, 
quhair  sa  gret  jeoperdeis  apperit.  The  king,  rejosing  of  thismira- 
kill,  past  the  remanent  nicht  in  his  prayaris  with  gud  esperance  ot 
victorie.  ” 


*  Revolving, 

f  Whose. 

X  Pavilion,  tent. 

§  By  the  same. 

|  Closed  with  a  snap. 


**  Without, 
ff  Where. 

XX  Empty. 

§§  Dreading. 
Ull  Lost. 


1314  A.D.]  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn, 


2  1 1 


Of  far  greater  interest  is  another  incident  of  this 
night,  reported  by  Sir  Thomas  Gray,  from  the  testi¬ 
mony  of  his  father,  then  a  prisoner  in  the  Scottish 
camp.  He  says  that  the  Scottish  leaders  were  satis¬ 
fied  that  enough  had  been  gained  on  that  Sunday  to 
justify  them  in  beating  a  retreat  without  dishonour, 
before  the  overwhelming  numbers  of  the  English. 
They  had  kept  the  appointed  tryst,  met  and  defeated 
their  foes  in  the  open  field,  and  their  King  had  slain 
the  English  champion.  The  requirements  of  the 
chivalrous  code  had  been  amply  satisfied,  and  Bruce 
was  free  once  more  to  resort  to  his  usual  strategy  of 
wasting  the  country  and  making  it  impossible  for  a 
hostile  army  to  maintain  existence  therein.  But  just 
as  they  were  on  the  point  of  abandoning  their  lines 
and  marching  to  the  wild  district  of  the  Lennox,  on 
the  west  of  Stirling,  Sir  Alexander  de  Seton,  a  Scot¬ 
tish  knight  in  the  English  service,  having  deserted 
King  Edward’s  camp,  rode  to  Bruce’s  tent  in  the 
wood,  and  told  him  that  if  ever  he  meant  to  be  King 
of  Scotland,  now  was  his  time:  “  for,”  said  he  “the 
English  have  lost  heart  and  are  disconcerted  ;  they 
are  dreading  a  sudden  assault.”  He  described  the 
disposition  of  their  forces,  and  pledged  his  life  that 
if  Bruce  attacked  them  next  morning,  he  would  van¬ 
quish  them  without  fail. 

Barbour  is  the  sole  authority  for  yet  another  inci¬ 
dent  of  this  eventful  Sunday  evening.  David  Earl 
of  Athol  owed  special  ill-will  to  Edward  de  Brus, 
the  husband  of  his  sister  Isabel,  because  Edward  ne¬ 
glected  her  in  favour  of  the  sister  of  Sir  Walter  de 
Ros,  whom  he  loved  “per  amouris.”  Athol,  there- 


2  T  2 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1314  A.D. 


fore,  made  an  attack  upon  the  Scottish  commissariat 
at  Cambuskenneth,  slaying  Sir  John  of  Airth  and 
some  of  the  guards.  Lord  Hailes  assumes  that  this 
was  a  deed  of  treachery,  but  it  is  doubtful  if  Athol 
ever  was  in  the  service  of  King  Robert.  Hailes, 
without  quoting  authority,  states  that  he  joined  the 
Scottish  cause  in  1313;  but  he  was  under  English 
command  at  Dundee  in  1311,*  attended  Parliament 
at  Westminster  in  December,  1312,  f  and  in  October, 
1314,  received  lands  in  England  to  recoup  him  for 
those  he  had  lost  in  Scotland.;):  So  if  he  ever  joined 
Bruce,  it  could  only  have  been  for  a  few  months  pre¬ 
vious  to  Bannockburn,  and,  on  the  appearance  of 
King  Edward  north  of  the  Border,  he  attached  him¬ 
self  to  what  seemed  the  stronger  side. 

An  English  chronicler  is  chiefly  responsible  for  the 
statement  that  King  Edward’s  troops  passed  the 
night  of  Sunday  23d  in  revelry.  “You  might  have 
seen,”  says  Sir  Thomas  de  la  More,  “  the  English 
in  the  fore  part  of  the  night  drunk  with  wine  in  man¬ 
ner  most  unlike  the  English,  belching  forth  their 
debauch,  and  shouting  wassail  and  drinkhail  with 
extraordinary  noise.  The  Scots  on  the  other  hand, 
kept  the  sacred  vigil  in  fasting  and  silence,  burning 
with  the  love  of  their  country  and  of  freedom.”  This 
is  confirmed  by  the  following  doggerel  couplet  from 
the  poem  of  one  Baston,  a  Carmelite  friar,  who  accom¬ 
panied  the  English  army  in  order  to  celebrate  its 
triumph.  But  having  fallen  prisoner  into  the  hands 


*  Bain,  iii. ,  404. 
f  Ibid.,  59. 
t  Ibid. ,  75. 


1314  a.d.]  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn . 


213 


of  the  Scots,  he  proved  the  versatility  of  his  Muse, 
and  at  the  same  time  purchased  his  ransom,  by  turn¬ 
ing  his  poem,  most  of  which  probably  was  already  in 
manuscript,  into  a  paean  of  victory  for  the  arms  of 
Bruce. 

“  Dum  se  sic  jactant  cum  Baccho  nocte  jocando, 

Scotia,  te  mactant,  verbis  vanis  reprobando.” 

It  was  a  common  thing,  as  attested  by  numerous 
entries  in  the  records,  for  commanders  to  serve  out 
liquor  to  their  men  before  a  battle,  and  perhaps  King 
Robert  would  have  done  the  like,  if  he  had  possessed 
the  means. 

If  the  King  of  Scots  really  had  decided,  as  Sir 
Thomas  Gray  affirms,  to  evacuate  his  position,  he 
changed  his  mind  on  receiving  the  intelligence  con¬ 
veyed  by  Sir  Alexander  de  Seton,  and  resolved  to 
await  the  attack  of  the  English. 

At  dawn  on  St.  John’s  day  mass  was  celebrated 
in  the  Scottish  lines  by  the  Abbot  of  Inchaffray. 
Then  the  men  broke  their  fast,  and  the  King  con¬ 
ferred  knighthood  on  James  of  Douglas  and  Walter 
the  Steward.*  At  sunrise,  or  shortly  after,  the  Scot¬ 
tish  army  moved  out  of  the  woods  f  and  took  up 
the  alignment  chosen  by  the  King,  the  divisions 


*  It  is  difficult  to  suppose  that  these  two  officers,  each  holding  im¬ 
portant  command  in  the  Scottish  army,  had  remained  simple  esquires 
up  to  this  time.  No  doubt  they  were  knights  already,  and  the  fur¬ 
ther  honour  now  conferred  raised  them  to  the  rank  of  knights  ban¬ 
neret,  which  could  only  be  created  on  the  field  of  battle. 
f“  Tuk  the  plane  full  apertly. ” — The  Brus ,  c.  15. 

“Tinrent  reddement  lour  chemyn  deuers  lost  dez  Engles.”  Scala- 
cronica ,  142. 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[13!4  A.D. 


2  1  4 


being  in  the  formation  called  “  en  schiltrome.”  *  The 
position  seems  to  have  been  slightly  different  to  that 
occupied  on  the  previous  day,  f  and  it  is  doubtful 
if  the  Borestone  Hill  was  occupied  by  more  Than 
a  vedette.  The  right  division,  under  Edward  de 
Brus,  held  the  higher  ground  between  Gray  Stale  and 
New  Park,  its  right  flank  resting  on  the  Bannock,  at 
the  point  where  its  banks  become  precipitous.  The 
central  division,  under  Randolph,  lay  along  the 
north-west  extremity  of  Halbert’s  Bog ;  and  the  left 
division,  under  the  Steward  and  Douglas,  posted  on 
the  slopes  nearest  to  St.  Ninian’s  church.^  The  left 
and  centre  lay  along  the  lines  now  marked  by  the 
road  between  Gray  Stale  and  St.  Ninian’s.  The  re¬ 
serve,  consisting  of  the  men  of  Carrick  and  Argyll, 
with  the  Islanders  under  Sir  Angus  of  Bute,  was  held 
in  command  of  King  Robert  in  person,  in  rear  of 
the  general  line.  In  military  language,  the  whole 
army  was  in  echelon  by  the  right :  that  is  to  say — 
the  centre  was  thrown  back  from  the  right,  and  the 
left  from  the  centre.  The  non-combatants — camp- 
followers,  baggage  guard,  and  servants — were  sent 


*  A  military  term  used  by  Gray  and  Barbour  to  express  the  for¬ 
mation  of  infantry  in  a  dense  column,  which  could  be  turned  into  a 
square  to  resist  cavalry  by  halting,  facing  the  rear  ranks  to  the  right¬ 
about,  and  turning  the  flank  sections  outwards. 

f  In  analysing  the  position  of  the  Scottish  army,  I  have  had  the 
advantage  of  studying  a  paper  drawn  up  by  Major  (now  General  Sir 
Evelyn)  Wood,  who  critically  inspected  the  ground  in  1872. 

X  The  site  of  this  church  is  marked  by  the  tower  of  one  erected 
long  after  the  date  of  the  battle.  The  building  of  which  this  tower 
formed  part,  was  used  by  Charles  Edward’s  troops  in  1746  as  a 
powder  magazine,  and  blown  up  by  them  on  their  retreat. 


1314  a.d.]  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn. 


215 


to  the  rear,  and  hidden  in  a  glen  on  the  ground  still 
known  as  Gillies’  Hill.'* 

While  the  Scottish  divisions  were  taking  up  their 
positions,  the  English  host  came  in  view,  making  a 
magnificent  and  brilliant  display  in  the  morning 
sunlight.  Edward’s  new  favourite,  Hugh  le  Des- 
penser,  was  in  his  train  ;  not  better  liked  by  the 
barons  than  the  last  one,  if  we  may  believe  Sir 
Thomas  de  la  More,  who  alludes  to  him  as  vecors 
itle  milvus — that  cowardly  kite.  There  were  in 
attendance  also  several  bishops  and  other  ecclesi¬ 
astics.  It  is  said  that  King  Edward,  when  he  saw 
the  mean  array  opposed  to  him,  lacking  in  all  the 
gorgeous  heraldry  and  splendid  armour  which  blazed 
over  his  own  columns,  asked  his  attendants  if  these 
men  really  meant  to  fight.  There  were  riding  at 
his  bridle  the  Earl  of  Pembroke  and  Sir  Giles  de 
Argentine,  reputed  the  third  knight  in  Christendom  ; 
but  it  was  Sir  Ingelram  de  Umfraville  who  made 
reply,  saying  that  they  assuredly  would  fight,  and 
added  the  advice  that  the  English  should  make  a 
feint  of  retiring,  so  as  to  tempt  the  Scots  into 
pursuit.  He  knew  his  countrymen  too  well  to 
doubt  that  they  would  break  away  from  their  posi¬ 
tion  as  soon  as  they  believed  the  English  were  in 
retreat,  in  spite  of  all  their  officers  might  do.  Once 
get  them  out  of  the  formidable  “schiltrome  ”  forma¬ 
tion  and  they  would  be  completely  at  the  mercy  of 
the  better  equipped  and  mounted  English. 

But  King  Edward. would  none  of  his  advice  ;  he 
was  too  proud  even  to  affect  to  retire  before  such 


*  Meaning  “  the  Servants’  Hill  ”  ;  from  the  Gaelic  giola,  a  servant. 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1314  A.D. 


2l6 


ragged  rabble,  and  well  was  it  for  Bruce  that  his 
troops  were  spared  this  trial  to  their  steadiness. 

“See!”  cried  King  Edward,  “am  I  not  right? 
they  kneel  for  mercy.”  For  at  that  moment  the 
Abbot  of  Inchaffray  was  moving  along  the  front  of 
the  Scottish  lines,  bearing  aloft  the  crucifix,  and 
each  division  knelt  as  he  passed. 

“You  speak  sooth  now,  Sire  !  ”  said  Sir  Ingelram, 
gravely,  “  they  crave  mercy,  but  not  from  you.  It 
is  God’s  mercy  they  implore.  Those  men  will  never 
fly  :  they  will  win  all  or  die.” 

“  Now  be  it  so  !  ”  quoth  Edward,  who,  after  all 
was  the  son  of  Malleus  Scottorum  ;  “we  shall  see.” 

Then  he  bade  the  trumpets  sound  “  Advance  !  ” 

Now  became  apparent  the  sagacity  shown  by  the 
King  of  Scots  in  his  choice  of  position.  The 
ground  near  Caldan  Hill  being  impracticable,  the 
main  advance  of  the  English  had  to  be  directed 
between  Parkmill  and  Charters  Hall.  A  body  of 
500  men-at-arms  under  the  Earl  of  Gloucester  rode 
before  the  nine  English  divisions,  and  led  the  attack 
on  the  Scottish  right.  But  owing  to  the  cramped 
nature  of  the  ground,  they  could  not  attempt  to 
deploy,  until  they  were  actually  on  the  Scottish  line. 
Moreover,  as  Sir  Thomas  de  la  More  mentions,  they 
were  thrown  into  great  disarray  by  the  covered  pits 
with  which  the  King  of  Scots  had  protected  the 
right  of  his  line.  In  spite,  however,  of  these  diffi¬ 
culties,  the  English  horsemen  pressed  on,  their 
advance  being  covered  by  a  cloud  of  archers,  who 
made  their  way  where  the  heavy  cavalry  could  not 
pass.  The  Scots,  ever  greatly  inferior  to  the  Eng 


A  A 


I 

n 

m 


K 


FIFLB  OF  BANNOCKBURN 


The  Mine?  oT Scots,  com  mandi  ng  the' 

Scottish  reserve 

Scottish  Divisions 

Right  Division,  under  Edward  de  Br us 

Centre  Division,  un  der  R and olplv. 

Left  Division,  under  Douglas  if  Walter 

the  Steward. 

SOO  light  horse,  under  Sir  Robert  de* 
Leith,  sent  to  disperse  English  archers. 

Baggage  train-. 

Randolph  's  encounter  with  de  CUf lords 
and  de  Beaumont’s  cavalry. 


-'F."'  Tfaf  Ring  of  England 

English  Dinsions,  thrown  into  com¬ 
fits  wrt  by  the  nature  of  the  ground, 
attempting  to  cross  the  Bann  ock 
and  deploy 

®  C/oacester's  heaiy  cavalry  charging 
'  English  archers  plagi  n g  on  Ediva  rd 
de  Brass  f  lank  . 

^  Cavalry  under  de  Clifford  and  de  Beau¬ 
mont,  sent  forward  on  c7une-  to 
communi'CCLtes  iff t k  Stirling  Castlm 


1314  A. D.]  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn. 


2i  7 


lish  in  archery,  also  extended  their  bowmen  ;  but 
these  were  quickly  driven  in.* 

The  brunt  of  the  fighting  was  borne  by  Edward 
de  Brus’s  division  on  the  right.  While  he  was 
resisting  the  repeated  charges  of  English  heavy 
cavalry  in  front,  the  archers  swarmed  into  the 
broken  ground  on  his  right,  and  poured  a  galling 
fire  upon  his  flank.  The  position  was  critical. 
Behind  the  cavalry,  the  whole  weight  of  the  Eng¬ 
lish  columns  was  pressing  forward,  though  greatly 
hampered  by  want  of  room.  In  vain  the  gallant 
Gloucester  strove  to  break  that  iron  “  schiltrome.” 
His  horse  fell  disembowelled  by  the  cruel  pikes, 
and,  according  to  some  accounts,  it  was  here  this 
brave  knight  met  a  soldier’s  death.  The  English 
could  not  deploy  to  their  right,  because  of  Halbert’s 
Bog,  which  protected  the  Scottish  centre  ;  Randolph, 
therefore,  was  free  to  take  ground  to  his  right  and 
thereby  support  Edward  de  Brus.  Still,  the  Scots 
were  falling  fast  under  the  fire  of  archers ;  and  the 
moment  had  come  for  King  Robert  to  make 
masterly  use  of  his  small  body  of  cavalry  under 
Sir  Robert  de  Keith.  He  sent  that  knight  with 
his  whole  force  of  500  horse  round  the  right  rear, 
to  take  the  English  archers  in  flank.  Keith  was 
completely  successful^  He  charged  the  sharp¬ 
shooters  with  great  spirit,  scattered  them  like  chaff, 
and  Edward  de  Brus  was  free  to  concentrate  his 
attention  on  the  enemy  in  front. 

*  Lanercost,  225. 

f  Lord  Ilailes  pronounces  Keith’s  charge  to  have  been  decisive 
of  the  battle. 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1314  A.D. 


2l8 

By  this  time  King  Robert  had  moved  up  his 
reserve  into  the  first  line,  taking  the  place  vacated 
by  Randolph  in  closing  towards  Edward  de  Brus. 
The  whole  ground  from  Parkmill  to  the  north-west 
corner  of  Halbert’s  Bog,  about  half  a  mile  square, 
was  crowded  with  English,  rapidly  falling  into  dis¬ 
order.  Wounded  chargers  plunged  madly  down 
among  them  from  the  mel6e  in  front,  while  the 
pressure  of  the  advancing  columns  behind  increased 
every  moment.  Once  more  the  Scottish  archers 
came  into  play,  this  time  with  murderous  effect,  and 
the  slaughter  on  this  part  of  the  field  was  terrific. 
The  splendid  English  array  was  getting  into  hope¬ 
less  confusion — hopeless,  because  their  immense 
numbers  made  it  impossible  to  restore  order  among 
them.  Men  jammed  into  one  mass  of  living,  dead, 
and  dying,  cannot  obey  orders,  be  they  never  so 
clearly  delivered.  At  this  critical  moment  there 
occurred  a  circumstance,  probably  unpremeditated, 
which  decided  the  fortunes  of  the  day.  The  camp- 
followers  had  been  watching  the  struggle  from  the 
security  of  Gillies’  Hill.  They  had  seen  the  Scot¬ 
tish  columns  repel  Gloucester’s  <pvalry,  had  heard 
their  victorious  cheers,  and  could  discern  the  tumult 
in  the  English  ranks.  Far  from  yielding  a  foot,  the 
divisions  of  Edward  de  Brus  and  Randolph  had 
rather  advanced,  and  the  King  had  led  his  reserve 
into  the  thick  of  the  fighting.  Assuredly  the  field 
was  won,  and  the  moment  for  plunder  had  arrived. 
The  rascals  sprang  to  their  feet  and,  waving  flags 
extemporised  out  of  blankets  and  tent-poles,  rushed 
down  the  hillside  with  loud  cheers.  The  English 


1314  a.d.]  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn. 


219 


mistook  them  for  fresh  troops,  and  began  to  give 
ground ;  the  rearward  movement  became  a  rout, 
the  rout  a  panic,  and  then  a  fearful  scene  of  butchery 
ensued.  About  a  mile  and  a  half  from  the  field, 
to  the  south  of  Bannockburn  House,  is  a  place  still 
called  the  Bloody  Fauld,  where  a  body  of  English 
rallied  and  made  a  determined  stand.  They  all 
perished.  According  to  some  accounts  it  was  here, 
and  not  near  Parkmill,  that  Gloucester  met  his  death. 

The  English  King  had  witnessed  the  action  from 
the  elevation  of  Charters  Hall,  nearly  opposite  the 
Scottish  right.  He  was  very  nearly  captured.  Some 
Scottish  knights,  fighting  on  foot, seized  the  trappings 
of  his  war  horse,  but  Edward  stoutly  defended  him¬ 
self  with  his  mace,  felling  several  of  his  assailants.* 
His  horse  was  disembowelled,  but  a  fresh  one  was 
brought  up  for  him,  and  Pembroke  laying  his  hand 
on  the  reins,  told  him  all  was  lost  and  that  he  must 
fly.  Sir  Giles  de  Argentine,  his  other  attendant, 
said  : 

“  Sire,  I  was  placed  in  charge  of  your  rein  :  seek 
your  own  safety.  There  is  your  castle  of  Stirling, 
where  your  body  may  be  in  safety,  For  myself — I 
am  not  accustomed  to  fly  ;  nor  shall  I  do  so  now. 

I  commend  you  to  God  !  ” 

Setting  spurs  to  his  horse,  he  charged  into  the 
thick  of  Edward  de  Brus’s  square,  shouting,  “  Argen¬ 
tine  !  Argentine !  ”  and  fell,  pierced  with  many 
wounds. 

How  many  of  the  English  rank  and  file  perished 


*  Scalacronica,  142. 


220 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1314  A.D, 


on  the  field  will  never  be  known  ;  nor  can  it  be 
guessed  in  proportion  to  the  losses  among  those  of 
gentler  degree,  because  allowance  has  to  be  made  for 
the  custom  of  mediaeval  war,  whereby  the  lives  of 
nobles  and  knights  were  tenderly  preserved  when 
that  was  possible,  in  view  of  the  price  that  their  ran¬ 
som  would  bring  the  captors.  The  common  soldiers 
received  no  such  consideration.  Twenty-one  English 
barons  and  bannerets  were  slain,  including  such  re¬ 
nowned  commanders  as  the  Earl  of  Gloucester, 
nephew  of  King  Edward,  the  veteran  de  Clifford, 
Sir  Giles  de  Argentine,  and  Sir  Edmund  de  Mauley, 
the  Marshal  of  England,  who  was  drowned  in  the 
Bannock,  John  Comyn,  also,  and  Sir  Pagan  de  Typ- 
toft.  Forty-two  knights  perished,  and  sixty  were 
taken  ;  among  the  slain  being  Sir  Henry  de  Bohun, 
Sir  John  de  Harcourt,  and  Sir  Philip  de  Courtenay. 
The  number  of  other  gentlemen  of  coat-armour  who 
lost  their  lives  on  the  Sunday  and  Monday  is  put  by 
the  English  chroniclers  at  the  enormous  figure  of 
seven  hundred.* 

The  prisoners  taken  included  twenty-two  barons 
and  bannerets,  among  whom  were  the  Earls  of  Here¬ 
ford  f  and  Angus,  Sir  Ingelram  de  Umfraville,  Sir 
Thomas  Gray,  Sir  Antony  de  Lucy,  and  Sir  Thomas 
de  Boutetourt.  Sixty  knights  and  several  clerics 
were  also  among  the  prisoners.  Many  of  the  Eng¬ 
lish  of  all  ranks  had  sought  refuge  in  the  crags  of 
Stirling.  King  Robert  detached  a  force  to  dislodge 
them,  on  which  they  all  surrendered. 


*  Scutiferorum  septingentorum. — Walsingham. 
f  Taken  at  Bothwell  Castle  some  days  later. 


1314  A. D.]  The  Battle  of  Bannockburn . 


22  1 


If  the  statement,  commonly  accepted  by  histo¬ 
rians,  be  authentic,  that  30,000  perished  on  the  field 
and  in  the  flight,  then  about  one  half  of  Edward’s 
army  must  have  been  slaughtered — an  unusual  pro¬ 
portion  even  in  the  greatest  disasters.  No  doubt 
the  common  soldiers  fared  miserably  in  their  flight. 
Sir  Maurice  de  Berkeley,  in  command  of  the  Welsh, 
led  them  towards  the  Border ;  but  the  countrymen 
rose  and  slew  many  of  them  in  detail  among  the 
moors.  V x  victis  !  the  power  of  England  was  shat¬ 
tered  for  the  time,  and  none  may  reckon  the  amount 
of  individual  disaster. 

The  King  of  England  rode  with  Aymer  de  Valence 
and  a  body-guard  of  five  hundred,  to  the  gate  of 
Stirling  Castle,  and  claimed  shelter.  But  Sir  Philip 
de  Moubray  implored  him  to  hold  on  his  way,  for  the 
castle  must  needs  be  surrendered,  and  so  the  Kins' 
would  fall  into  the  hands  of  the  enemy.  Edward 
set  off  accordingly,  making  a  detour,  probably 
through  the  woods  to  the  west  of  the  castle  and 
battlefield,  and  galloped  away  for  Linlithgow.  Sir 
James  Douglas  getting  word  of  this,  went  to  King 
Robert  and  obtained  leave  to  give  chase  with  sixty 
horse,  which  were  all  that  could  be  spared.  On  his 
way  he  met  Sir  Laurence  de  Abernethy  with  a  fol¬ 
lowing  of  fourscore,  hastening  to  join  the  English 
army ;  who,  on  hearing  news  of  the  great  defeat, 
promptly  changed  sides,  and  joined  in  the  pursuit. 

King  Edward’s  escort  halted  at  Winchburgh  to 
bait,  but  it  was  too  strong  for  Douglas  to  offer  at¬ 
tack.  He  had  to  be  content  with  hanging  closely 
on  the  flanks  of  the  body-guard  as  far  as  Dunbar, 


222 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1314  A.D, 


where  the  Earl  of  March  opened  his  friendly  gates, 
and  received  the  King  into  safety.*  From  Dunbar 
Edward  escaped  in  a  small  boat  to  Berwick, f  whence 
he  published  a  humiliating  document  on  June  27th, 
announcing  the  loss  of  his  signet,  of  which  the  keeper, 
Roger  de  Northburgh,  with  his  two  clerks,  had  been 
taken  prisoner,  and  warning  all  persons  against  obey¬ 
ing  orders  issued  under  it.  The  King  of  Scots,  how¬ 
ever,  was  a  foe  too  chivalrous  to  take  unfair  advantage 
of  his  opportunity ;  he  returned  the  seal  to  Edward, 
on  condition  that  it  should  not  be  used. 

In  like  manner  as  Fordun  attributed  the  victory 
of  the  Scots  to  the  piety  of  their  King,  “  who  put 
his  trust,  not  in  a  host  of  people,  but  in  the  Lord 
God,”  and  conquered  through  the  help  of  Him  to 
whom  it  belongeth  to  give  the  victory,”  so  Sir 
Thomas  de  la  More  ascribed  King  Edward’s  escape 
to  the  direct  intervention  of  the  Virgin,  “  for,”  says 
he,  “  it  was  not  the  speed  of  ahorse  nor  craft  of  man 
that  delivered  the  King  from  his  enemies,  but  the 
Mother  of  God  whom  he  invoked.  He  vowed  to  her 
and  her  Son  that,  if  he  escaped,  he  would  build  a  house 
for  poor  Carmelites,  dedicated  to  the  Mother  of  God, 
to  be  used  by  twenty-four  students  of  theology. 


*  Barbour  describes  the  closeness  of  the  pursuit  in  language  so 
vivid,  that  Lord  Hailes  took  refuge  in  Latin  to  convey  the  poet’s  illus¬ 
tration.  Perhaps  it  is  obscure  enough  in  its  antique  English  to  en¬ 
dure  quotation  in  the  original. 

“  And  he  was  alwaisby  them  ner, 

He  let  tham  nocht  haf  sic  laser 

As  anis  water  for  to  ma.” — The  Brus,  cix.r  55. 


\  Lanercost,  227. 


223 


1314  A. D.]  'The  Battle  of  Bannockburn. 


This  vow  he  afterwards  fulfilled  at  Oxford,  and 
provided  the  expenses,  notwithstanding  the  remon¬ 
strance  of  Hugh  le  Despenser.”  Such  was  the  origin 
of  Oriel  College, 

De  Valence,  Earl  of  Pembroke  having  seen  King 
Edward  safely  off  the  battle-field,  did  not  accompany 
him  in  his  flight.  Probably  his  horse  was  killed,  for 
he  escaped  on  foot,  and  made  his  way  to  Carlisle. 

There  remains  to  be  mentioned  the  loss  suffered 
by  the  victors  in  this  great  battle.  It  was  insignifi¬ 
cant  compared  with  that  of  the  English.  The  only 
knights  of  renown  who  are  known  to  have  fallen 
were  Sir  William  de  Vipont  and  Sir  Walter  de  Ros. 
The  last-named  was  Edward  de  Brus’s  dearest  friend, 
and  the  brother  of  his  paramour,  Isabel  de  Ros.* 

*  Edward  obtained  a  dispensation  to  marry  Isabel  de  Ros,  by 
whom  he  had  a  son  Alexander  ;  but  it  was  only  dated  June  i,  1317, 
a  few  months  before  his  death,  so  it  is  not  likely  that  the  marriage 
ever  took  place. 


Sir  Humphrey  de  Bohun. 


Sir  Philip  de  Moubray. 


CHAPTER  X. 

INVASION  OF  ENGLAND  AND  IRELAND  BY  THE 

SCOTS. 

A.D.  1314-1317. 

SIR  PHILIP  DE  MOUBRAY  delivered  up  his 
command  of  Stirling  Castle,  according  to 
stipulation,  and  entered  the  service  of  the 
King  of  Scots. 

The  English  historian,  Walsingham,  will  not  be 
suspected  of  partiality  for  the  victors  of  Bannock- 
.  burn  ;  the  greater  weight  therefore  is  carried  by  his 
testimony  to  the  merciful  treatment  of  the  prisoners 
by  King  Robert,  who  thereby  won  the  affection  of 
many  who  had  fought  against  him.  According  to 
the  custom  of  war,  a  proportion  of  the  prisoners 
taken  in  a  general  action  were  credited  to  the  com- 
mander-in-chief,  to  whom  their  ransom  should  be 
payable.  Among  those  thus  allotted  to  the  King’s 
share  were  his  relative,  Sir  Marmaduke  de  Twenge, 
and  his  old  friend,  Sir  Ralph  de  Monthermer,  both 
of  whom  he  released  unconditionally.  Sir  Marma- 


224 


BOTHWELL  CASTLE,  THE  QUADRANGLE. 

(From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros Dundee .) 


* 


1314-17  A. D.]  England  and  Ireland  Invaded.  225 

duke,  seeing  no  chance  of  escape  from  the  field,  lay 
hidden  all  night  in  the  woods.  Next  day  when 
King  Robert  went  forth  to  survey  the  scene  of  the 
battle,  the  knight  came  forward  and  knelt  before 
him.  The  King  greeted  him  kindly  and  asked  to 
whom  he  yielded  himself  prisoner.  “  To  none  save 
your  Majesty/’  answered  Sir  Marmaduke.  “  Then  I 
receive  you,”  said  Bruce,  and  afterwards  entertained 
him  hospitably,  and  sent  him  back  to  England  with 
a  handsome  present.  Sir  Ralph  had  carried  King 
Edward  s  shield  or  scale  in  the  battle,  and  accom¬ 
panied  him  in  his  flight  from  the  field,  but,  falling 
behind,  was  captured  by  Douglas’s  men.  Bruce 
allowed  him  to  carry  Edward’s  shield  back  to 
England.  The  bodies  of  Gloucester  and  de  Clifford 
he  sent  to  England  for  honourable  burial. 

The  Earl  of  Hereford,  the  Earl  of  Angus,  Sir 
John  de  Segrave,  Sir  Ingelram  de  Umfraville,  and 
Sir  Antony  de  Lucy  found  their  way  to  Bothwell 
Castle  on  the  Clyde,*  almost  the  only  Scottish  for¬ 
tress  still  flying  the  English  flag.  Soon  afterwards 
they  were  besieged  by  Edward  de  Brus  and  capitu¬ 
lated.  Three  months  later,  on  October  2d,  Hereford 
obtained  his  release  in  exchange  for  the  Queen  of 
Scots  and  her  two  daughters,  the  Bishop  of  Glasgow 
and  the  young  Earl  of  Mar.f  King  Robert  had 
been  parted  from  his  wife  and  daughters  for  eight 
years. 

*  Latter  cost,  228. 

f  Bain,  iii.,  74.  The  Queen  had  been  removed  in  March  from 
Barking  Abbey  to  Rochester  Castle,  where  she  was  allowed  20 s.  a 
week  for  her  expenses. 


226  Robert  the  Bruce.  [1314  A.D.- 

Fordun  exults  over  the  vast  sums  obtained  for  the 
ransom  of  other  nobles  and  knights  taken  prisoners. 

“  The  whole  land  of  Scotland,”  he  says,  “  overflowed 
with  boundless  wealth.” 

His  crushing  defeat,  the  loss  of  all  his  stores,  the 
capture  or  death  of  many  of  his  best  generals,  and, 
above  all,  the  terrible  loss  of  English  prestige,  might 
have  disposed  Edward,  had  he  been  a  wiser  monarch 
or  surrounded  by  wiser  counsellers,  to  begin  negotia¬ 
tions  for  peace  as  soon  as  he  was  safe  at  York.  But 
there  is  nothing  to  show  that  he  entertained  the  idea. 
His  borders  were  left  without  defence,  and  King 
Robert,  having  at  command  such  active  lieutenants 
as  his  brother  Edward,  on  whom  he  had  bestowed 
his  own  earldom  of  Carrick,  and  the  Black  Douglas, 
was  not  likely  to  neglect  his  opportunity.  He  sent 
Carrick,  Douglas,  and  de  Soulis  to  invade  Northum¬ 
berland  in  the  beginning  of  August.  They  wasted 
the  whole  of  that  county  ;  the  unhappy  farmers 
being  doomed  to  see  their  ripening  crops  trodden  to 
mire  or  burned,  and  all  their  live-stock  driven  away. 
The  ecclesiastical  registers  of  Carlisle,  Durham,  and 
York  contain  letters  presenting  a  piteous  memorial 
of  the  terrors  of  this  and  the  succeeding  years. 
The  bishoprick  of  Durham  bought  immunity  from 
fire,  at  least,  by  paying  a  heavy  indemnity ;  but  the 
Scots  penetrated  Yorkshire  as  far  as  Teesdale,  and  re¬ 
turned  by  Appleby  and  Coupland,  which  they  burnt. 

On  September  9th,  King  Edward  assembled  his 
Parliament  at  York.  The  Earl  of  Pembroke  was 
appointed  Guardian  of  the  country  between  Trent 
and  Tweed.  Letters  were  considered,  brought  by 


1317  a. d.j  England  and  Ireland  Invaded.  227 

Ralph  Chilton,  a  friar,  from  the  King  of  Scots,  ex¬ 
pressing  his  earnest  desire  for  a  lasting  peace  between 
the  two  nations,  and  asking  for  a  safe-conduct  for 
the  following  commissioners  to  treat  for  the  same — 
Sir  Nigel  Campbell,  Sir  Roger  de  Kirkpatrick,  Sir 
Robert  de  Keith,  and  Sir  Gilbert  de  la  Haye.  The 
required  passports  were  made  out,  and  commissioners 
were  appointed  to  represent  England ;  but  although 
a  conference  between  the  two  parties  actually  took 
place  at  Dumfries,  the  proceedings  came  to  nought, 
probably  owing  to  the  refusal  of  the  English  commis¬ 
sioners  to  pay  royal  honours  to  the  name  of  King 
Robert.  On  November  26th,  and  again  on  Decem¬ 
ber  26th,  the  Archbishop  of  York  wrote  to  various 
knights  and  ecclesiastics,  bidding  them  prepare  for 
fresh  invasion,  as  the  negotiations  for  truce  had 
failed.*  His  prediction  was  immediately  fulfilled, 
for  the  Scots  once  more  poured  across  the  Border, 
and  forced  the  sorely  harassed  people  of  Tyne- 
dale  to  do  homage  to  King  Robert.  No  assistance 
from  the  central  government  could  be  hoped  for, 
because  Edward  was  involved  again  in  strife  with 
his  barons,  so  the  English  dalesmen  were  left  to 
organise  such  resistance  as  they  could  under  the  di¬ 
rection  of  the  warlike  Archbishop,  and  the  bishops 
of  Carlisle  and  Durham.  It  was  not  very  effective  ; 
many  were  made  captives  and  held  to  ransom.  The 
county  of  Cumberland  paid  800  marks  for  a  truce 
to  last  from  Christmas,  1314,  to  Midsummer  Dgiy, 
1315-f  Among  the  papers  in  the  register  of  Durham 


*  Raine,  233,  237. 
|  Latter  cost ,  230. 


228 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1314  A.D.- 


is  the  record  of  a  pathetic  incident.  It  is  the  inquest 
on  the  body  of  an  unhappy  countryman  who,  having 
climbed  the  church  tower  of  Houghton-le-Spring  in 
order  to  have  a  better  view  of  the  Scots  passing  over 
the  plain  below,  fell  down  from  under  the  bells  and 
was  killed.  To  the  verdict  of  accidental  death  was 
added  a  rider,  which  must  have  been  very  consolatory 
to  the  parishioners  who  had  lost  all  their  possessions, 
to  the  effect  that,  although  the  floor  of  the  tower  had 
undoubtedly  been  polluted  by  the  blood  of  the  de¬ 
ceased,  the  jury  did  not  consider  that  there  was  any 
reason  to  interrupt  the  ordinary  services  in  the 
church.* 

All  these  ransoms  and  indemnities  had  made  the 
King  of  Scots  strong  in  the  sinews  of  war,  and  he 
prepared  to  extend  the  area  of  operations.  The 
O’Neills  of  Ulster  had  been  making  overtures  to 
him,  complaining  of  the  exactions  of  their  English 
rulers,  and  offering  the  crown  of  Ireland  to  Edward, 
Earl  of  Carrick.  In  consequence  of  this  an  expedi¬ 
tion  was  resolved  on,  which  seems  to  one  looking 
back  on  those  distant  days  the  sole  blunder  com¬ 
mitted  by  Robert  the  Bruce  from  the  day  he  finally 
took  up  the  cause  of  Scottish  independence.  There 
was  fighting  and  rapine  enough  in  Britain,  God  knows, 
to  satisfy  a  nature  far  more  ferocious  than  that  of 
the  King  of  Scots,  without  seeking  more  in  other 
lands.  Yet,  before  committing  himself  to  what 
proved  such  a  disastrous  enterprise,  Robert  must 
have  weighed  the  advantage  of  dividing  the  English 
forces  against  the  prudence  of  dividing  his  own. 

*  Raine,  249. 


1317  A.D.]  England  and  Ireland  Invaded. 


229 


Besides,  a  crown  was  a  crown  in  those  days.  Great 
must  have  been  the  temptation  to  provide  so  fitting 
a  reward  for  his  brother’s  priceless  services.  Bruce 
had  accomplished  already,  in  securing  the  Scottish 
crown,  a  far  heavier  piece  of  work  than  seemed  to 
lie  between  him  and  the  conquest  of  Ireland  ;  while, 
from  a  strategic  point  of  view,  it  would  be  no  trifling 
advantage  thus  to  plant  on  the  flank  of  England  a 
power  friendly  to  Scotland. 

The  expedition  went  forward.  The  Earl  of  Car- 
rick  landed  at  Carrickfergus  on  May  25,  1315,  with 
6000  men  and  some  of  the  best  knights  in  Scotland. 
Among  these  were  the  King’s  two  nephews,  Ran¬ 
dolph,  Earl  of  Moray,  and  John,  son  of  Sir  Nigel 
Campbell  of  Lochow,  Sir  Philip  de  Moubray,  lately 
King  Edward’s  governor  at  Stirling,  Sir  John  de 
Soulis,  and  Sir  John  de  Menteith. 

Before  they  started  King  Robert  assembled  a 
Parliament  at  Ayr  on  Sunday,  April  25,  1315.  The 
chief  business  before  it  was  urgent  enough,  being  the 
settlement  of  the  succession  to  the  throne,  for  the 
King  had  at  this  time  only  one  child,  the  Princess 
Marjorie,  and  his  own  mode  of  life  during  the  last 

nine  years  had  been  the  reverse  of  conducive  to  lon¬ 
gevity. 

It  was  enacted  that,  should  the  King  die  without 
heirs  male,  the  succession  should  devolve  on  Edward, 
Earl  of  Carrick,  and  his  heirs  male  ;  whom  failing, 
on  Princess  Marjorie.  In  the  event  of  a  minor  suc¬ 
ceeding  under  this  disposition,  the  Earl  of  Moray 
was  to  be  guardian  of  the  heir  and  the  kingdom. 
Should  all  these  heirs  fail,  then  Moray  was  to  be 


230 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1314  A.D.- 


guardian  of  the  realm,  till  the  prelates  and  magnates 
of  Scotland  should  determine  the  succession. 

The  choice  made  by  King  Robert  of  a  husband 
for  his  daughter  was  a  momentous  one,  affecting,  as 
it  afterwards  turned  out,  the  dynasties  of  both  the 
Scottish  and  English  thrones  to  a  very  remote  pos¬ 
terity.  Walter,  High  Steward  of  Scotland,  was  the 
knight  selected  as  a  consort  for  the  Princess ;  but 
their  married  life  was  brief  indeed,  for  Marjorie  died 
in  her  first  confinement,  on  March  2,  1316,  leaving  a 
son,  afterwards  Robert  II.  of  Scotland. 

On  the  return  of  the  ships  which  conveyed  the 
army  to  Ireland,  King  Robert  fitted  them  out  for  a 
fresh  expedition  to  the  western  islands,  which  he 
visited  in  company  with  his  son-in-law  the  Steward. 
As  Barbour  is  the  only  authority  for  this  excursion, 
and  as  his  statement  that  John  of  Lorn  was  made 
prisoner  in  the  course  of  it  is  now  known  to  be  con¬ 
trary  to  fact,  importance  need  not  be  attached  to  his 
account  of  the  events  of  these  early  summer  months. 
But  it  is  probably  true  that  about  this  time  the  King 
received  the  submission  of  the  islanders  without 
much  difficulty.  While  passing  through  Dunbarton 
in  April,  he  granted  the  privilege  of  garth  or  sanctu¬ 
ary  to  Malcolm,  Earl  of  Lennox,  in  reward  for  his 
timely  help  in  bygone  days  of  adversity.  * 

The  various  truces  purchased  by  the  English  bish- 
opricks  expired  on  the  first  anniversary  of  Bannock¬ 
burn— St.  John’s  Day,  June  24,  1315.  The  Archbishop 
of  York  had  held  a  council  of  war  at  Doncaster  on 
the  Monday  after  Ascension  Day,  to  devise  means 


*  The  Lennox,  by  William  Fraser,  i.,  236. 


1317  A. D.]  England  and  Ireland  Invaded.  231 


to  put  the  Border  in  a  state  of  defence*;  but  it 
does  not  seem  that  it  profited  much,  for  on  June 
29th  Douglas  led  a  raid  through  the  county  of  Dur¬ 
ham,  and  occupied  the  town  of  Hartlepool,  the  in¬ 
habitants  seeking  safety  in  their  shipping.  There 
was  no  burning, f  but  such  booty  as  had  escaped 
former  forays  was  secured. 

On  July  22d,  the  King  of  Scots  in  person  began 
the  siege  of  Carlisle,  a  town  against  which  he  cher¬ 
ished  a  stern  purpose  of  revenge,  as  the  scene  of  the 
ignominious  death  of  his  brothers  Thomas  and  Alex¬ 
ander,  in  1306.  The  castle  was  held  by  a  knight  of 
great  renown,  Sir  Andrew  de  Harcla.  The  Francis¬ 
can  chronicler  of  Lanercost  has  left  a  minute  account 
of  the  siege,  of  which  he  must  have  been  an  invol¬ 
untary  witness.  It  lasted  eleven,  days,  on  each  of 
which  assaults  were  made  on  one  of  the  three  gates, 
or  all  three  simultaneously.  But  the  citizens  worked 
gallantly  with  the  garrison  in  defence,  keeping  the 
assailants  at  bay  with  showers  of  stones  and  flights 
of  arrows.  The  Scots  made  a  huge  machine  where¬ 
with  to  hurl  stones  against  the  gates  ;  the  defenders 
made  seven  or  eight  similar  ones.  The  garrison  had 
also  springalds  for  firing  darts,  and  with  these  and 
other  devices  they  wrought  great  mischief  among 
the  besiegers.  Then  the  Scots  built  a  great  wooden 
tower  on  wheels,  tall  enough  to  overtop  the  walls ; 
whereupon  the  English  built  a  taller  one.  But  the 
Scottish  engine  never  came  into  play,  sticking  fast 
in  the  mud  of  the  moat.  Wheeled  bridges,  too, 


*  Raine,  246. 
f  Lanercost ,  230. 


232 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1314  A.D.- 


which  they  attempted  to  throw  across  the  ditches, 
fell  into  the  water  and  sank  ;  and  attempts  to  fill  the 
ditches  with  green  corn  cut  in  the  neighbourhood 
failed  also. 

At  last  all  mechanical  siege  appliances  having 
broken  down,  King  Robert  resolved  to  carry  the 
place  by  sheer  force  of  muscle  and  cold  iron.  On 
the  ninth  and  tenth  days  a  general  attack  was  de¬ 
livered,  chiefly  against  the  eastern  side  of  the  cita¬ 
del.  On  the  tenth  day,  the  attention  of  the  garrison 
being,  it  was  hoped,  concentrated  on  this  part, 
Douglas  took  an  escalading  party  to  the  west  side, 
opposite  the  house  of  the  Minorite  friars,  where  a 
sally  port  may  still  be  seen.  Here  the  Scots  actu¬ 
ally  got  over  the  walls,  but  encountered  more  resist¬ 
ance  than  they  had  reckoned  on.  The  ladders, 
crowded  with  men,  were  flung  down  ;  many  were 
killed,  and  Douglas  had  to  beat  a  retreat,  leaving 
some  prisoners  in  the  hands  of  the  English. 

The  siege  was  suddenly  raised  on  August  1st,  when 
the  Scots,  alarmed,  it  would  seem,  by  the  approach 
of  an  English  force,  decamped,  leaving  all  their  rude 
siege  appliances  behind  them.  Brave  Sir  Andrew  de 
Harcla  then  sallied  from  his  fortress,  hung  on  the 
flanks  of  the  retreating  Scots,  and  made  two  very 
important  prisoners,  to  wit,  John  de  Moray  and  Sir 
Robert  Bardolf,  “  a  man,”  observes  the  friar,  “  of  the 
worst  possible  disposition  to  Englishmen.”  John  de 
Moray  was  a  valuable  prize;  he  had  distinguished 
himself  at  Bannockburn,  and  received  as  his  share  a 
number  of  the  prisoners  taken  there,  whom  he  held 
to  ransom.  For  the  capture  of  these  two  warriors, 


1317  A.D.]  England  and  Ireland  Invaded. 


Sir  Andrew  received  a  guerdon  of  1000  marks  from 
his  King,  but  it  will  be  seen  presently  that  this  was 
not  the  last  move  in  the  game. 

The  only  satisfaction  gained  by  the  Scots  in  this 
campaign  was  such  as  they  might  derive  from  having 
thoroughly  burnt  and  wasted  Allerdale,  Coupland, 
and  Westmorland,  and  plundered  the  churches  of 
Egremont  and  St.  Bees. 

On  January  io,  1316,  the  King  of  Scots  and  Dou¬ 
glas,  made  a  night  attack  on  Berwick  *  There  was  at 
that  time  no  wall  between  the  Brighouse  and  the  cas¬ 
tle,  and  the  Scots,  attacking  simultaneously  by  land 
and  sea,  came  very  near  capturing  the  town.  But 
the  moon  was  bright  that  night ;  the  assailants  were 
detected  and  repulsed,  with  the  loss  of  Sir  John  de 
Landells,  Douglas  himself  escaping  with  difficulty  in 
a  small  boat. 

Nevertheless,  the  position  of  Berwick  was  becom¬ 
ing  desperate.  The  successful  defence  of  Carlisle  had 
been  owing  as  much  to  the  foresight  and  activity  of 
the  Archbishop  of  York  and  the  Bishop  of  Durham 
in  providing  supplies,  as  to  the  gallantry  of  its  com¬ 
mander  and  garrison.  Without  stores  the  bravest 
soldiers  must  succumb,  and  the  indifference  shown 
by  Edward  to  reiterated  complaints  of  the  shocking 
scarcity  in  Berwick,  can  only  be  accounted  for  by 
the  increasing  confusion  of  his  own  affairs.  For  Ber¬ 
wick  was  not  only  a  fortress  of  the  first  importance, 
but  it  was  one  into  which  supplies  could  easily  be 
thrown  from  the  sea.  Perhaps  the  blame  should 
rest  chiefly  with  Aymer  de  Valence,  Earl  of  Pem- 


*  Lanercost. 


234 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1314  A.D.- 


broke,  who  continued  guardian  of  the  northern  Eng¬ 
lish  counties  till  August,  1315,  and  was  responsible 
for  the  defences  of  the  Border.  His  performance 
throughout  the  Scottish  war,  from  the  moment  that 
he  allowed  Bruce  to  slip  through  his  fingers  in  Glen- 
trool,  and  suffered  defeat  at  London  Hill,  had  dimmed 
the  lustre  of  this  celebrated  knight’s  earlier  renown. 
He  had  been,  at  all  events,  almost  uniformly  unsuc¬ 
cessful.  * 

In  February  and  March,  1316,  Sir  Maurice  de 
Berkeley,  Governor  of  Berwick,  wrote  to  King  Ed¬ 
ward  to  say  that  his  soldiers  were  actually  dying  of 
starvation  on  the  walls.  Whenever  a  horse  died,  the 
men-at-arms  boiled  and  ate  it,  not  allowing  the  foot- 
soldiers  a  mouthful  till  they  themselves  had  eaten  all 
they  wanted.  He  assured  the  King  that  the  town 
must  be  lost  unless  relief  speedily  came.f  On  Feb¬ 
ruary  14th  the  garrison  mutinied,  and  a  party  of  Gas¬ 
cons,  setting  the  Governor’s  orders  at  defiance,  for 
they  vowed  it  was  better  to  die  fighting  than  to 
starve,  rode  on  a  foray  in  Tweeddale. 

Sir  Adam  de  Gordon,  who  had  joined  the  Scottish 
service  after  Bannockburn,  detected  them  on  their 
return  march,  driving  a  lot  of  cattle  before  them. 
He  reported  the  circumstance  to  Douglas,  who  took 
the  field  at  once  with  Sir  William  de  Soulis,  Sir 
Henry  de  Balliol,  and  a  small  troop  of  horse,  and 
rode  to  intercept  the  raiders  at  Scaithmoor,  in  the 

*  Born  in  1280,  Pembroke  at  this  period  was  just  at  his  prime  as  a 
soldier.  Piers  Gaveston,  with  whom  he  was  no  favourite,  had  nick¬ 
named  him  Joseph  the  Jew,  because  of  his  sallow  complexion. 

\  Bain,  iii.,  89. 


1317  a.d.]  England  and  Ireland  Invaded.  235 


parish  of  Coldstream.  The  Gascons  seeing  the  Scots 
approach,  sent  forward  the  cattle  in  charge  of  some 
countrymen,  and  at  once  formed  the  “  schiltrome.”  * 
But  the  Scots  charged  them  with  such  fury  that 
their  formation  gave  way,  and  they  were  scattered 
with  the  loss  of  20  men-at-arms  and  60  foot.  Con¬ 
temporary  letters,  preserved  in  the  Tower  collection, 
confirm  in  a  remarkable  way  Barbour’s  accuracy  in 
recording  this  affair.  The  only  mistake  he  makes  is 
in  calling  Raimond  Caillu,  a  Gascon  who  was  killed, 
Ewmond  de  Caliou,  and  in  styling  him  governor  of 
Berwick  instead  of  King’s  sergeant-at-arms.  He  says 
that  this  was  the  hardest  bit  of  fighting  Douglas  ever 
had  to  do,  and  perhaps  he  was  right,  for  the  starving 
Gascons  would  stand  stoutly  and  strike  shrewdly  for 
their  half-won  dinners. 

Midsummer,  1316,  saw  the  Scots  once  more  over 
the  Border.  It  was  a  season  of  great  famine  and 
scarcity,  and  no  wonder,  so  long  had  the  energies  of 
both  countries  been  diverted  from  peaceful  occupa¬ 
tion.  The  Scots,  under  a  leader  whose  name  has  not 
been  preserved,  penetrated  as  far  as  Richmond  in 
Yorkshire,  while  King  Edward  held  his  court  at 
York.  The  town  of  Richmond  bought  off  the  invad¬ 
ers,  who  marched  thence  60  miles  to  the  west,  destroy¬ 
ing  and  burning  everything  in  their  way,  till  they 
came  to  Furness,  hitherto  unvisited  by  any  raiders, 
where  they  made  great  spoil.  They  were  especially 
delighted  at  the  abundance  of  iron  there,  a  commod¬ 
ity  of  which  Scotland  produced  very  little  at  that  time. 

Edward  de  Brus,  Earl  of  Carrick,  had  by  this  time 


*  The  Brus ,  cxviii.,  42. 


236 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1314  A.D.- 


been  campaigning  in  Ireland  for  more  than  a  year. 
The  horrors  of  that  warfare  lie  beyond  the  limits  of 
this  narrative,  but  those  who  have  a  mind  to  realise 
the  sufferings  of  the  unhappy  inhabitants,  alternately 
inflicted  by  the  English  under  the  Earl  of  Ulster, 
brother  of  the  Queen  of  Scotland,  and  by  the  Scots 
under  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  brother  of  the  King  of 
Scotland,  may  gratify  their  curiosity  by  consulting 
the  Annals  of  Clonmacnoise.  The  sequence  of  the 
chief  events  was  as  follows :  Carrick,  who  received 
the  support  of  the  native  chiefs  of  Ulster,  having 
wasted  the  lands  of  all  English  settlers  in  the  north, 
stormed  and  burnt  Dundalk,  on  June  29,  1315* 
The  Earl  of  Ulster,  allied  with  the  native  King  of 
Connaught,  marched  against  the  invaders,  destroy¬ 
ing  the  lands  of  all  who  supported  the  Scots.  The 
two  armies  met  at  Conyers,  on  September  10th:  the 
English  were  defeated,  and  de  Brus  laid  siege  to 
Carrickfergus.  On  December  6th  the  siege  was 
raised,  and  the  Scots  marched  south  through  Meath 
into  Kildare,  defeating  a  superior  force  at  Kenlis 
under  Roger,  Lord  Mortimer.*  On  January  20, 
1316,  de  Brus  encountered  Edmund  Butler,  the  jus¬ 
ticiar  of  Ireland,  at  Arscoll  in  Kildare,  and  again 
put  the  English  to  flight,  though  on  this  occasion 
also  the  Scots  were  far  inferior  in  numbers.  Two 
Scottish  knights  of  distinction,  Fergus  of  Ardrossan 
and  Walter  de  Moray,  fell  in  this  action. 


*  Lord  Hailes,  with  some  hesitation,  assigns  a  later  date  to  this 
battle,  but  a  letter  from  Sir  John  de  Hothum  to  Edward  II.,  written 
from  Dublin  on  February  15,  1316,  sets  the  true  date  beyond  dispute. 
— Bain,  iii.,  Introduction,  xxiv.,  and  p.  89. 


1317  a. D.i  England  and  Ireland  Invaded.  237 


Twice  during  this  campaign,  in  September,  1315. 
and  March,  1316,  the  Earl  of  Moray  had  occasion  to 
return  to  Scotland  for  reinforcements,  and  twice  he 
returned  to  the  bloody  work  of  conquest.  It  is 
astonishing  how  so  poor  and  small  a  country  as  Scot¬ 
land  could  meet  such  a  prolonged  strain  on  its  fight¬ 
ing  power  as  had  been  involved  already  in  the  War 
of  Independence,  and  yet  find  a  surplus  to  sacrifice 
beyond  its  shores. 

After  his  victory  at  Arscoll,  the  Earl  of  Carrick  re¬ 
turned  to  Ulster.  The  whole  of  Ireland,  during  these 
years  of  misery,  was  afflicted  by  a  direful  famine, 
always  the  unfailing  complement  of  mediaeval  war¬ 
fare.  So  great  was  the  scarcity  that  the  Irish  annal¬ 
ists  declare  that  “  men  were  wont  to  devour  one 
another.”*  For  that  unhappy  land  was  the  theatre 
of  war,  not  only  between  English  and  Scots,  and  the 
Irish  allies  on  each  side,  but  independently,  between 
the  MacDermotts  and  the  O’Conors,  the  royal  tribe 
of  Connaught  ;  so  that  the  best  that  can  be  said  for 
Edward  de  Brus’s  enterprise  is  that  he  did  not  inflict 
any  greater  suffering  on  the  Irish  people  than  they 
were  in  the  habit  of  inflicting  on  each  other.  The 
war  was  conducted  on  the  same  barbarous  lines  by 
all  the  combatants,  and  the  description  given  in  the 
Amials  of  Clonmacnoise  of  the  Earl  of  Ulster’s  op¬ 
erations,  apply  to  each  of  them  in  proportion  to  his 
strength.  The  English  are  described  in  that  chron¬ 
icle  as — 

“  holding  on  their  course  of  spoyleing  and  destroying  all  places 
where  they  came,  not  spearing  Church  or  Chapel,  insomuch  that  they 


*  Annals  of  the  Four  Masters,  vol.  iii.,  p.  521. 


238 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1314  A.D.- 


did  not  leave  neither  field  of  Corne  undestroyed,  nor  towne  unran¬ 
sacked,  nor  unfrequented  place  (were  it  never  so  desert)  unsearched 
and  unburnt,  and  consumed  to  meere  ashes  the  very  churches  that 
lay  in  their  way  into  the  bear  stones.”  * * * § 

The  proceedings  of  the  MacDermott  party  are 
painted  in  even  blacker  colours — 

“  They  pursued  Felym  (O’Conor)  and  Mullronyto  Letterlong,  and 
to  the  borders  of  the  mount  of  Sliew-Gawe,  and  also  to  the  valley 
called  Gleanfahrowe,  where  infinite  numbers  of  Cowes,  Gerans,  f 
and  sheep  were  killed  by  them.  They  strip  d  Gentlemen,  \  that 
could  make  no  resistance,  of  their  cloaths  to  their  naked  skinns  ;  de¬ 
stroyed  and  killed  without  remorse  children  and  little  ones  of  that 
Journey.  There  was  not  seen  so  much  hurt  done  in  those  parts  be¬ 
fore  in  any  man’s  memory,  without  proffit  to  the  doers  of  the  harm.  § 

The  Earl  of  Carrick  hastened  back  to  the  siege  of 
Carrickfergus,  and  arranged  a  truce  with  the  garrison 
till  April  13th.  But  Lord  Mandeville,  coming  to  its 
relief,  refused  to  be  bound  by  this  treaty,  and  a 
bloody  encounter  took  place  in  the  town,  wherein 
Lord  Mandeville  was  slain  on  the  English  side,  and 
Niel  Fleming  on  the  Scottish.  The  garrison  agreed 
to  surrender  unless  relieved  before  May  3Isb 

On  May  2,  1316,  Edward  de  Brus  was  crowned 
King  of  Ireland. 

The  day  appointed  for  the  capitulation  of  Carrick¬ 
fergus  having  arrived,  a  party  of  Scots  was  sent  to 
take  possession.  These,  however,  were  treacherously 
seized  and  imprisoned,  the  English  commander  vow¬ 
ing  he  meant  to  defend  his  castle  to  the  last.  In  the 

*  Mageoghegan’s  translation. 

f  Ponies. 

J  Gentlewomen  also,  according  to  the  Annals  of  Connaught. 

§  Annals  of  Clonmacnoise. 


1317  A.D.]  England  and  Ireland  Invaded.  239 


end,  some  time  during  the  summer,  he  was  compelled 
to  surrender,  after  the  garrison  had  suffered  inde¬ 
scribable  hardships  through  famine. 

The  chief  object  of  the  Earl  of  Moray’s  second 
voyage  to  Scotland  was  to  convey  an  earnest  en¬ 
treaty  from  the  new  King  of  Ireland  for  the  personal 
assistance  of  the  King  of  Scots,  with  Edward  de 
Brus’s  assurance  that  they  would  prove  irresist¬ 
ible  if  united  in  the  field.  King  Robert,  therefore, 
leaving  his  realm  under  the  guardianship  of  Douglas 
and  Walter  the  Steward,  sailed  from  Loch  Ryan 
early  in  the  autumn  of  1316,  and  joined  Edward  at 
Carrickfergus.  It  was  probably  before  this  date 
that  the  national  party  in  Scotland  received  a  very 
important  accession  in  the  person  of  Patrick,  Earl 
of  March,  the  same  who  had  given  shelter  to  King 
Edward  in  his  flight  from  Bannockburn.*  Of  course 
this  greatly  lightened  the  King’s  anxiety  about  the 
security  of  the  East  Marches,  though  Berwick  was 
still  held  by  the  English. 

King  Robert’s  first  encounter  on  Irish  soil  was 
unfortunate.  He  met  the  enemy  on  October  25th, f 
under  Lord  Bisset  of  Antrim  and  an  Irish  chief  called 
Cogan  or  Logan,  who  defeated  him,  and  took  Alan 
the  Steward  prisoner.  During  the  winter  the  King 
of  Scots  remained  in  Ulster :  then  he  and  his 
brother  pushed  southward  through  Louth,  arriving 
at  Slane  on  February  16,  1317.  Everything  con¬ 
nected  with  this  extraordinary  expedition  is  vague 

*Bain.,  iii,  103. 

f  Barbour  says  it  was  in  May,  but  this  cannot  be  reconciled  with 
the  dates  given  by  Irish  annalists. 


240 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1314  A.D.- 


and  uncertain,  except  its  main  outlines,  for  the  Irish 
annalists  are  very  contradictory,  and  the  minute 
details  given  by  Barbour  are  not  to  be  received  with¬ 
out  reserve.  But,  under  that  reserve,  two  incidents 
described  by  the  poet  will  bear  repetition. 

The  English  army  was  encamped  on  the  borders 
of  Leinster,  to  resist  the  entrance  of  the  two  kings 
into  that  province.  The  King  of  Scots,  who  seems 
to  have  assumed  the  chief  command,  succeeded  in 
outmanoeuvring  the  enemy,  and  continued  to  advance 
upon  Dublin.  But  while  the  Scots  were  passing 
through  a  wood,  their  rear  division,  under  the  im¬ 
mediate  command  of  King  Robert,  were  attacked 
by  a  party  of  English,  who  galled  them  with  a 
destructive  discharge  of  arrows.  Edward,  in  com¬ 
mand  of  the  vanguard,  continued  to  advance,  una¬ 
ware  of  the  presence  of  the  enemy.  The  King  of 
Scots,  suspecting  that  the  archers  were  the  advance 
party  of  the  English  army,  would  not  allow  any 
attempt  to  be  made  to  disperse  them,  but  continued 
to  move  forward  in  “  schiltrome.”  Sir  Colin  Camp¬ 
bell,  irritated  by  the  daring  of  a  couple  of  sharp¬ 
shooters  who  pressed  nearer  than  their  comrades, 
turned  his  horse,  galloped  after  them,  and  slew  one 
with  his  spear.  But  the  other  bowman  let  fly  a 
shaft  which  killed  Sir  Colin’s  horse.  King  Robert 
then  rode  up,  and  dealt  Sir  Colin  such  a  blow  with 
his  truncheon  that  it  felled  the  knight  to  the  ground. 

Disobedience — “the  breking  of  bidding" — might 
not  be  overlooked  at  such  a  time,  for  it  might  have 
turned  to  their  undoing.* 


*  The  Brus ,  cxx. 


1317  a.d.i  England  and  Ireland  Invaded. 


241 


The  scene  perhaps  has  been  faithfully  drawn,  and 
is  not  likely  to  have  been  the  bard’s  invention  ;  but 
when  Barbour  proceeds  to  point  the  moral,  by  as¬ 
serting  that  when  the  Scots  had  cleared  the  wood, 
they  found  40* *000  English  drawn  up  in  battle  array 
under  Richard  de  Clare,  whom  forthwith  they 
attacked  and  vanquished,  he  is  making  an  almost 
incredible  statement,  of  which  there  is  no  corrobora¬ 
tion  elsewhere.  Moreover,  one  is  asked  to  believe 
that  this  was  accomplished  by  the  single  division 
under  the  King  of  Scots.  It  seems  impossible  that 
Edward  de  Brus,  as  Barbour  affirms,  can  have  led 
his  vanguard  so  carelessly  through  an  enemy’s  coun¬ 
try,  as  to  have  passed  40,000  men  without  becoming 
aware  of  their  presence,  besides  maintaining  no 
communication  with  the  rear  division.  This  is  an 
instance  of  the  disadvantage  of  having  to  rely  on  the 
poetical  labours  of  an  ecclesiastic  for  an  account  of 
military  operations. 

As  the  Scottish  host  approached  Dublin,  the  seat 
of  English  rule  in  Ireland,  the  spirit  of  its  citizens 
rose  to  the  occasion.  They  burned  their  suburbs 
and  pulled  down  a  church  to  strengthen  their  de¬ 
fences  ,  they  even  went  so  far  as  to  imprison  the 
Earl  of  Ulster— the  “Red  Earl”— because  they 
suspected  him,  most  unjustly,  of  complicity  with  his 
brother-in-law,  the  King  of  Scots.  Dublin  proved 
too  strong  to  be  attacked,  though  Castle  Knock* 

belonging  to  the  Tyrrels,  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
Scots. 

The  invaders  remained  four  days  at  Leixlip  on 

*  In  what  is  now  the  Phoenix  Park. 

l6 


242 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1314  A.D.- 


the  Liffey,  whence  they  marched  to  Naas,  and  so 
to  Cullen,  on  the  borders  of  Tipperary.  Ultimately 
they  penetrated  as  far  as  Limerick,  wasting  and  burn¬ 
ing  all  as  they  went.  It  is  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
this  town  that  Barbour  lays  the  scene  of  the  other 
incident  above  referred  to.  The  troops  had  fallen 
in,  ready  to  start  on  their  homeward  march,  and 
were  awaiting  the  King  s  command  to  move,  when 
the  wail  of  a  woman  in  pain  was  heard.  King  Rob¬ 
ert  asked  what  it  meant,  and  was  informed  that  it 
was  an  Irish  washerwoman  among  the  campfol- 
lowers,  who  had  been  seized  with  the  pains  of  child¬ 
birth,  and  whom  it  would  be  necessary  to  leave 
behind.  Touched  with  pity,  the  King  caused  the 
whole  army  to  remain  still,  while  a  tent  was  un¬ 
packed  and  pitched  for  the  poor  woman  s  reception  ; 
“  for,”  said  he, 

“  Certis  I  trow  thar  is  na  man 

That  he  will  rew  ne  *  a  woman  than. 

This  was  ane  full  gret  curtasy, 

That  sic  ane  king  and  sa  michty 
Gert  his  men  duelL-f-  on  this  maner 
Bot  for  ane  full  pouer  lavender.”  % 

Well  may  one  pause  at  this  point  to  ask  if  this  is 
the  same  Robert,  King  of  Scots,  who  showed  him¬ 
self  so  wary  and  so  much  averse  to  unnecessary 
bloodshed  in  the  winning  of  his  own  realm.  For 
what  goal  can  he  be  straining  in  roaming  so  far  from 
his  proper  sphere  ?  what  strategy  is  he  pursuing,  in 


*  Who  will  not  pity. 

\  Made  his  men  wait. 

\  For  a  poor  washerwoman. 


1317  a.d.]  England  and  Ireland  Invaded.  243 


allowing  an  enemy  so  powerful  to  occupy  all  the 
ground  between  him  and  his  base  of  operations? 
Above  all — if,  as  cannot  be  doubted,  he  loved  his 
own  people  who  had  suffered  so  sorely  in  his  cause — 
if  he  had  any  concern  for  the  future  of  the  kingdom 
it  had  cost  so  much  to  win — how  could  he  suffer 
himself  to  be  severed  for  so  long  from  all  communi¬ 
cation  with  Scotland,  and  from  all  intelligence  of 
how  things  were  faring  at  home?  To  answer  these 
questions,  one  is  reduced  to  almost  sheer  conjecture. 
Perhaps  it  was  the  bare  necessity  of  subsistence  that 
had  led  the  invading  army  further  and  further  in 
search  of  supplies  with  the  illusory  prospect  of  win¬ 
ning  the  support  of  native  tribes  in  the  south  and 
west.  Some  picture  is  traced  in  the  sorrowful  annals 
of  these  times  of  the  straits  to  which  the  Scots  were 
reduced  in  that  famine-stricken  land.  Many  of  them 
were  starved  to  death,  and  the  survivors  were  re¬ 
duced  to  living  on  the  flesh  of  their  horses. *  The 
Irish  annalists  mention  with  horror  that  the  natives 
who  marched  with  the  Scots  did  not  scruple  to  eat 
meat  in  Lent,  and  were  punished  next  year  for  that 
deadly  offence  by  being  reduced,  first  to  eat  human 
flesh,  and  then  to  die  of  starvation. 

If  the  Kings  of  Scotland  and  Ireland  had  been 
led  so  far  afield  in  the  expectation  of  a  general 
rising  in  their  favour  under  the  native  chiefs,  the 
illusion  was  very  completely  dispelled.  To  the 
Irish  Celts  the  de  Brus  seemed  as  much  Norman  as 
de  Burgh  or  de  Bermingham — more  so  in  fact,  for 
the  de  Burghs  at  least  had  acquired  by  marriage  a 


*  Fordun,  cxxxii. 


244 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1314-17  A.D.- 


standing  among  the  royal  OConors  of  Connaught. 
All  that  Robert  and  Edward  de  Brus  had  any  reason 
to  expect,  and  all  that  they  received  from  the 
moment  they  left  Ulster,  was  temporary  and  pre¬ 
carious  alliance  with  those  septs  who  saw  in  them 
instruments  whereby  to  carry  on  their  private  feuds. 

In  the  month  of  March  the  English  were  in  force 
at  Kilkenny  under  Edmund  Butler  and  Richard  de 
Clare.  Lord  Hailes  and  others  have  commented 
on  their  inactivity,  and  blamed  them  for  want  of 
vigilance  in  allowing  the  Scots  to  escape  from  their 
wretched  plight  with  impunity.  But  in  truth  the 
difficulties  that  pressed  so  hardly  on  the  invaders 
lay  with  even  greater  weight  on  the  defenders.  The 
English  had  a  far  larger  army  to  feed  than  the 
Scots,  though  the  figure  of  30,000  given  in  the  Irish 
annals  is  probably  far  beyond  their  actual  strength ; 
doubtless  scarcity  of  supplies  was  the  chief  cause 
of  their  allowing  the  dilapidated  remains  of  Bruce’s 
army  to  retrace  their  steps  almost  without  resist¬ 
ance.  Another  and  subsidiary  reason  was  that 
Roger  Mortimer  was  on  his  way  back  to  Ireland 
as  Viceroy,  and  the  opening  of  the  summer  cam¬ 
paign  was  postponed  till  his  arrival.  He  landed  on 
April  7,  1317,  but  by  that  time  the  Scots  were  far 
on  their  way  to  Ulster. 

In  May  the  King  of  Scots  returned  to  his  own 
dominions,  to  find  that  Douglas  and  Walter  the 
Steward  had  faithfully  discharged  their  duty  as 
guardians. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

CONTINUED  SUCCESS  OF  THE  SCOTTISH  ARMS. 

A.D.  1316-1319. 

IT  is  a  relief  to  turn  from  the  dismal  record  of  the 
Irish  campaign  and  resume  the  course  of  events 
in  Scotland.  There,  too,  there  had  been  suffer¬ 
ing  and  anxiety,  and  the  pages  are  plentifully  sprin¬ 
kled  with  blood  ;  but  it  is  at  least  a  more  inspiriting 
story  than  the  ignoble  slaughter  of  starving  and  half- 
naked  kernes  in  a  quarrel  between  English  and  Scots, 
for  a  dominion  which  both  were  striving  to  usurp. 

There  had  been  stirring  times  in  King  Robert’s 
absence,  and  his  taste  for  knight-errantry  must  have 
caused  him  some  twinges  of  envy  as  he  listened  to 
the  report  which  Douglas  had  to  lay  before  him. 

Not  a  solitary  gleam  of  good  fortune  had  shone 
on  the  English  arms  since,  in  the  spring  of  1315, 
John  of  Lorn  had  recaptured  the  Isle  of  Man,* 
which  Bruce  had  conquered  in  June,  1313^  Aymer 

*  Bain,  iii.,  80. 

f  Barbour  is  wholly  at  fault  in  his  account  of  the  capture  of  this 
chieftain  during  King  Robert’s  expedition  to  the  Western  Isles. 


245 


Robert  the  Bruce 


[1316  A.D.- 


246 


de  Valence,  having  failed  in  administering  the  ward 
enry  of  the  northern  counties,  had  been  superseded, 
in  part  at  least,  by  the  appointment  of  Thomas,  Earl 

of  Lancaster,  on  August  8,  1315**  A  great  muster 
of  English  troops  had  been  ordered  by  Lancaster  to 
take  place  at  Newcastle  on  June  24,  1316,  but  this 
had  been  postponed  by  royal  warrant  till  September 
10th,  thus  enabling  the  Scots  to  raid  Richmond  and 
Furness,  as  described  in  a  former  chapter.  Circum¬ 
stances  interfered  with  the  September  muster  also, 
and  once  more  action  was  deferred  till  October.  By 
that  time  the  King  of  Scots  had  sailed  for  Ireland, 
and  Richard  de  Kellow,  the  gallant  Bishop  of  Dur¬ 
ham,  was  dead.  His  successor  was  a  Frenchman, 
Ludovic  de  Belmont,  whom  the  Pope,  as  it  was  said, 
appointed  to  the  see  on  condition  that  he  should 
defend  the  Marches  against  the  Scots.  The  chron¬ 
icler  of  Lanercost,  professionally  summing  up  the 
new  bishop’s  qualifications,  describes  him  as  well¬ 
born,  but  lame  on  both  legs,  hospitable  notwith¬ 
standing,  and  of  a  merry  disposition.” 

The  English  army  assembled  according  to  orders 
at  Newcastle  after  Michaelmas,  but  King  Edward 
failed  to  appear  to  take  command.  Men  said  he 
could  not  brook  any  intercourse  with  the  Earl  of 
Lancaster,  so  the  troops  were  disbanded.  The  Eail 
of  Arundel,  however,  being  advised  by  spies  that  it 
was  a  propitious  time  for  a  raid  on  the  Mai  ches,  en- 


There  is  ample  documentary  proof  that  Lorn  was  Edward  II.  s 
admiral  on  the  west  coast,  and  continued  to  serve  as  such  till  he  re¬ 
turned  to  London  in  1317,  worn  out  and  about  to  die,  leaving  hu 
kinsman,  Sir  Dougall  Macdouall  of  Galloway,  his  executor.  Bain, 

iii. ,  80. 

*  Roiuli  Scoiice ,  i.,  149. 


1319  A.D.] 


Continued  Sticccss. 


247 


tered  Scotland  near  Jedburgh.  It  will  be  remem¬ 
bered  that  Roxburgh  Castle  had  been  dismantled 
after  its  capture  from  the  English  in  February,  1314; 
but  probably  it  was  in  their  possession  again  at  this 
time,  for  there  is  documentary  evidence  to  show  that 
they  had  reoccupied  it  before  the  spring  of  1317. 
Arundel’s  purpose,  according  to  Barbour,  was  to 
level  Jedworth  Forest,  because  it  gave  convenient 
harbour  to  the  Scots  when  preparing  to  raid  North¬ 
umberland,  and  to  that  end  his  men  were  armed 
with  felling  axes.*  Douglas  was  employing  his  leisure 
in  building  himself  a  house  at  Lintalee,  on  the  banks 
of  the  Jed,  having  with  him  about  fifty  men-at-arms 
and  a  company  of  bowmen.  Hearing  of  Arundel’s  ap¬ 
proach,  he  prepared  an  ambuscade  at  a  place  where 
the  Jed  flows  through  a  narrow  glen-wooded  gorge. 
He  made  the  passage  more  difficult  by  bending  down 
the  tops  of  young  birch-trees  and  weaving  them  to¬ 
gether  across  the  paths.  The  English  entered  the 
defile  without  suspicion,  and  suddenly  the  banks 
echoed  to  the  dreaded  war-cry :  “  Douglas !  Dou¬ 
glas  !  ”  The  archers  opened  a  heavy  fire  on  the 
flanks,  while  Douglas  charged  the  column  from  the 
rear.  The  English  commander  could  neither  deploy 
nor  form  square,  owing  to  the  narrowness  of  the 
ground  ;  his  men  fell  into  confusion,  and  were  routed 
with  heavy  loss,  Sir  Thomas  de  Richmond  himself 
being  slain  by  Douglas.f 

*  Barbour  puts  Arundel’s  strength  at  the  improbable  figure  of 
10,000,  besides  erroneously  giving  the  command  of  the  whole  to 
Thomas  de  Richmond  without  mentioning  Arundel. 

|  Not,  as  Hailes  follows  Barbour  in  believing,  one  of  the  house  of 
Brittany,  but  a  Yorkshire  knight,  owner  of  Burton-Constable.  He 


248 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1316  A.D.- 


Meanwhile,  another  band  of  English,  finding  the 
new  house  of  Lintalee  defenceless,  had  taken  posses¬ 
sion  of  it,  and  were  making  free  with  such  good  cheer 
as  they  could  lay  their  hands  on  ;  until  Douglas, 
returning  from  the  affair  in  the  glen,  surprised  them 
carousing,  and  put  most  of  them  to  the  sword. 

Still  more  to  the  liking  of  the  King  of  Scots  must 
have  been  the  next  feat  of  arms  by  the  Black  Dou¬ 
glas,  when  he  encountered  Sir  Robert  de  Neville,  the 
“  Peacock  of  the  North,”  near  Berwick.  Neville, 
weary  of  perpetually  listening  to  the  renown  of 
Douglas,  had  pledged  his  knightly  word  to  assail 
him  whensoever  he  should  see  his  banner  displayed  ; 
and  Douglas,  having  been  told  of  this  vaunt,  was  not 
slow  to  take  up  the  challenge.  He  marched  all  night 
to  Berwick,  where  Neville  was  stationed,  and  dis¬ 
played  his  banner — the  well-known  azure  field  with 
three  silver  stars.* * 

To  ensure  Neville’s  attention  he  fired  some  of  the 
neighbouring  villages.  The  Peacock  showed  no  de¬ 
lay  in  response,  but  marched  out  of  the  town  at  once 
with  a  party  of  picked  men-at-arms,  and  took  up  a 
position  on  a  hill.  Douglas  challenged  him  to  single 
combat ;  Neville  accepted,  of  course,  but  few  men 

was  at  the  siege  of  Caerlaverock  in  1300,  constable  of  Norham  in 
1310,  and  warden  of  Cockermouth  in  1314. 

*  The  old  arms  of  Douglas  were  :  Azure ,  three  stars  or  mullets, 
argent.  After  King  Robert’s  death,  the  stars  were  placed  on  an 
azure  chief,  while  below,  on  a  field  argent ,  was  shown  a  human 
heart,  gules.  It  was  not  till  long  afterwards  that  the  heart  was  sur¬ 
mounted  by  an  imperial  crown,  as  borne  at  the  present  time — Will¬ 
iam,  nth  Earl  of  Angus  and  1st  Marquis  of  Douglas  (1611-1660) 
having  been  the  first  to  assume  that  addition. 


1319  A.D.] 


Continued  Success . 


249 


could  engage  with  Douglas  on  equal  terms,  and  the 
English  knight  paid  for  his  daring  with  his  life.  The 
English,  disheartened  by  the  loss  of  their  gallant 
leader,  broke  and  fled.  The  usual  slaughter  followed, 
and  Neville’s  three  brothers,  Sir  Alexander,  Ralph 
and  John,  were  among  the  prisoners  taken.  They 
were  held  to  ransom  for  2000  marks  each.* 

About  the  time  that  these  events  were  taking 
place  on  the  Border,  the  English  landed  in  force 
near  Inverkeithing,  in  Fife.  The  Earl  of  Fife  and 
King  Robert’s  sheriff,  after  vainly  attempting  to 
prevent  them  landing,  retired  before  superior  num¬ 
bers,  their  retreat,  according  to  Barbour’s  showing, 
being  of  the  nature  of  sauve-qui-peut .  In  the  nick 
of  time  came  on  the  scene  a  stout  prelate,  William 
Sinclair,  Bishop  of  Dunkeld,  with  a  troop  of  sixty 
horse — 

“  Himself  was  armit  jolely 

And  rad  apon  ane  stalward  sted.” 

He  asked  the  earl  why  he  and  his  men  were  riding 
so  fast,  and,  on  the  reason  being  explained  to  him, 
rounded  on  him  in  a  tone  which  none  but  an  ecclesi¬ 
astic  would  have  dared  to  use  towards  a  powerful 
baron.  He  charged  him  flatly  with  cowardice,  and 
declared  that,  if  the  Earl  got  his  deserts,  the  King 
should  order  the  gilt  spurs  to  be  hewn  off  his  craven 
heels.  Then,  throwing  off  his  priestly  cloak,  the 
Bishop  appeared  in  full  armour,  and  called  on  the 

*  None  of  the  chroniclers,  so  far  as  I  know,  mention  the  capture  of 
Neville’s  brothers,  but  it  is  attested  by  their  petition  for  ransom. 
Ralph  begged  King  Edward  to  give  him  some  rich  ward  or  marriage, 
which  he  might  sell  in  order  to  raise  funds. — Bain,  iii. ,  101. 


250 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1316  A.D.- 


fugitives  for  very  shame  to  follow  him.  The  men 
only  wanted  a  leader :  they  rallied  at  once  under 
the  dauntless  prelate.  The  English  had  turned  to 
foraying,  and  were  scattered  far  and  wide,  except 
one  detachment  which  was  still  in  good  array.  This 
the  Scots’  cavalry  dispersed  by  a  furious  charge, 
driving  the  men  to  their  boats  ;  the  rest  were  slaugh¬ 
tered  in  detail,  and  thus  the  “  kynrik  ”  of  Fife  was 
saved.  When  the  King  of  Scots  heard  of  this,  he 
declared  that  Sinclair  should  be  his  bishop  ;  who  ac¬ 
cordingly,  until  his  death  and  long  after,  went  by 
the  name  of  “  the  King’s  bishop.” 

One  more  exploit  claims  mention  before  King 
Robert  reappears  on  the  scene.  It  has  been  told 
how  bravely  Sir  Andrew  de  Harcla  defended  Car¬ 
lisle  against  the  Scots,  and  how  he  received  King 
Edward’s  guerdon  for  the  capture  of  John  de  Moray. 
Harcla  himself  was  taken  prisoner  now,  riding  with 
300  men  “  horsit  jolely,”  by  Sir  John  de  Soulis  of 
Eskdale  with  but  fifty.  So  much  Barbour  tells  us, 
but  refrains  from  giving  the  particulars,  for,  says  he, 

“  I  will  nocht  rehers  the  maner, 

For  quha  sa  likis,  tha  may  her 
Yhoung  wemen,  quhen  the  will  play, 

Syng  it  amang  tham  ilke  day.”  * 

Would  that  the  archdeacon  had  preserved  for  us 
this  ballad  !  The  main  fact  is  confirmed  by  a  letter 
from  de  Harcla  to  King  Edward,  begging  that  he 

*  “  I  will  not  rehearse  the  manner, 

For  whoso  likes  may  hear 

Young  women,  when  they  are  at  play 

Sing  it  among  them  every  day.” 


1319  A.D.] 


Continued  Success . 


25 1 


may  have  John  de  Moray  and  Robert  Bard  (olph), 
whom  he  took  at  Carlisle,  in  aid  of  his  own  ransom. 
He  adds  that  his  valet,*  John  de  Beauchamp,  will 
explain  to  the  King  how  he  had  fallen  into  the  hands 
of  the  Scots  ;  and  thus  the  lover  of  Border  chivalry 
is  baulked  again  of  information  about  this  episode. 

The  first  business  claiming  the  attention  of  the 
King  of  Scots  on  his  return  from  Ireland  was  very 
different  to  any  that  he  had  been  engaged  in  for  a 
long  time.  King  Edward,  having  been  beaten  all 
along  the  line  in  military  operations,  now  sought  to 
enlist  on  his  side  the  influence  of  spiritual  powers. 
He  had  appealed  to  Pope  John  XXII.,  who,  at  Ed¬ 
ward’s  instance,  issued  a  bull,  commanding  a  truce 
for  two  years  between  England  and  Scotland,  under 
pain  of  excommunication.  Two  cardinals,  Guacelin, 
of  SS.  Marcellinus  and  Peter,  and  Luke,  of  S.  Maria 
in  the  Via  Lata,  were  sent  with  plenary  powers  to 
enforce  this  decree,  and  to  excommunicate  Robert 
de  Brus,  “  self-styled  King  of  Scotland,”  and  any 
others  who,  in  their  opinion,  deserved  it.  They  also 
had  power  to  absolve  Robert’s  subjects  from  their 
oath  of  fealty. 

Lord  Hailes  was  of  opinion  that  the  letter  of  the 
cardinals  to  the  Pope,  giving  an  account  of  the 
negotiations  which  ensued,  as  preserved  in  Ry- 
mer’s  Fcedera ,  contained  the  most  authentic  de¬ 
scription  of  the  Bruce’s  presence  which  had  come 
down  to  modern  times.  That  writer  has  given  a 
summary  of  this  letter  in  language  so  vivid,  and 

*  The  term  “valet”  did  not  mean  a  domestic  servant,  but  a 
gentleman-attendant. 


252 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1316  A.D.- 


representing  the  original  so  closely,  that  quotation 
is  at  once  fairer  to  him,  and  probably  more  effective, 
than  any  fresh  attempt  at  paraphrase. 

The  messengers  ( precursores )  sent  by  the  cardi¬ 
nals  were  the  Bishop  of  Corbau  and  the  Archdeacon 
of  Perpignan.*  They  waited  on  the  King  of  Scots 
about  the  beginning  of  September,  1317. 

“The  King,”  says  Lord  Hailes,  “  graciously  received  them  and 
heard  them  with  patient  attention.  After  having  consulted  with 
his  barons,  he  made  answer,  that  he  mightily  desired  to  procure  a 
good  and  perpetual  peace,  either  by  the  mediation  of  the  Cardinals, 
or  by  any  other  means.  He  allowed  the  open  letters  from  the  Pope, 
which  recommended  peace,  to  be  read  in  his  presence,  and  he  listened 
to  them  with  all  due  respect  ;  but  he  would  not  receive  the  sealed 
letters  addressed  to  ‘  Robert  Bruce  governing  in  Scotland.’  ‘  Among 
my  barons,’  said  he,  ‘there  are  many  of  the  name  of  Robert  Bruce, 
who  share  in  the  government  of  Scotland  ;  these  letters  may  possibly 
be  addressed  to  some  one  of  them  ;  but  they  are  not  addressed  to  me, 
who  am  Ring  of  Scotland.  I  can  receive  no  letters  which  are  not 
addressed  to  me  under  that  title,  unless  with  the  advice  and  approba¬ 
tion  of  my  parliament.  I  will  forthwith  assemble  my  parliament, 
and  with  their  advice  return  my  answer.’ 

“The  messengers  attempted  to  apologise  for  omission  of  the 
title  of  King  ;  they  said  that  Holy  Church  was  not  wont,  during 
the  dependence  of  a  controversy,  to  write  or  say  anything  which 
might  be  interpreted  as  prejudicial  to  the  claims  of  either  of  the 
contending  parties.  ‘  Since,  then,’  answered  the  King,  ‘  my  spiritual 
father  and  my  holy  mother  would  not  prejudice  the  cause  of  my 
adversary  by  bestowing  on  me  the  appellation  of  King  during  the 
dependence  of  the  controversy,  they  ought  not  to  have  prejudiced 
my  cause  by  withdrawing  that  appellation  from  me.  I  am  in  posses¬ 
sion  of  the  kingdom  of  Scotland  ;  all  my  people  call  me  King,  and 
foreign  Princes  address  me  under  that  title  ;  but  it  seems  that  my 
parents  are  partial  to  their  English  son.  Had  you  presumed  to 
present  letters  with  such  an  address  to  any  other  sovereign  Prince 


*  Papal  Letters,  ii.,  429. 


1319  A.D.] 


Continued  Success. 


253 


you  might,  perhaps,  have  been  answered  in  a  harsher  style  ;  but  I 
reverence  you  as  messengers  of  the  holy  see.’  He  delivered  this 
sarcastical  and  resolute  answer  with  a  mild  and  pleasant  counte¬ 
nance.* 

“  The  messengers  next  requested  the  King  to  command  a  tempo¬ 
rary  cessation  of  hostilities.  ‘  To  that,’  replied  the  King,  ‘  I  can 
never  consent  without  the  approbation  of  my  Parliament,  especially 
while  the  English  daily  invade  and  spoil  my  people.’ 

“The  King’s  counsellors  told  the  messengers  that  if  the  letters 
had  been  addressed  to  the  King  of  Scots,  the  negotiations  for  peace 
would  have  instantly  commenced.  They  imputed  the  slighting 
omission  of  the  title  of  King  to  the  intrigues  of  the  English  at 
the  Papal  court,  and  they  unguardedly  hinted  that  they  had  this 
intelligence  from  Avignon. 

“  ‘  While  the  title  of  King  is  withheld,’  said  the  messengers  to 
their  constituents,  *  there  can  be  no  hopes  of  a  treaty.’ 

“On  receiving  this  intelligence,  the  Cardinals  resolved  to  pro¬ 
claim  the  papal  truce  in  Scotland.  In  this  hazardous  office  they 
employed  Adam  Newton,  guardian  of  the  monastery  of  Minorites 
at  Berwick.  He  was  charged  with  letters  to  the  Scottish  clergy, 
and  particularly  to  the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews.  He  found  the 
King  of  Scots  with  his  army  in  a  wood  near  Old  Cambus,  making 
preparations  for  the  assault  of  Berwick.  Although  personal  access 
to  the  King  was  denied,  the  obedient  monk  proclaimed  the  truce  by 
authority  of  the  Pope.  When  the  King  of  Scots  was  informed  that 
the  papal  instruments  still  denied  him  his  titles,  he  returned  them 
saying,  ‘  I  will  listen  to  no  bulls,  until  I  am  treated  as  King  of  Scot¬ 
land  and  have  made  myself  master  of  Berwick.’ 

“The  monk,  terrified  at  this  answer,  requested  either  a  safe- 
conduct  to  Berwick,  or  permission  to  pass  into  Scotland,  and  deliver 
letters  to  some  of  the  Scottish  clergy.  But  both  his  requests  were 
denied,  and  he  was  commanded  forthwith  to  leave  the  country.  In 
his  return  to  Berwick  he  was  waylaid,  stripped,  and  robbed  of  all 
his  parchments,  together  with  his  letters  and  instructions.  The 
robbers,  it  is  said,  tore  the  Pope’s  Bull.”  f 

*  Laeta  facie  et  amicabili  vultu,  semper  ad  patrem  et  matrem 
reverentiam  ostendendo. — Fcedera,  iii.,  662. 

f  Hailes,  ii.,  93.  That  the  Pope’s  letters  were  torn  up  is  confirmed 
by  his  subsequent  letter  to  the  Cardinals — {Papal Letters,  ii.,  429). 


254 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1316  A.D.~ 


The  opening  of  the  Vatican  Records  by  Pope  Leo 
XIII.  to  the  students  of  all  nations  has  put  it  in  the 
power  of  modern  readers  to  corroborate  the  accuracy 
of  Hailes’s  interpretation  of  the  materials  at  his  dis¬ 
posal,  and  also  to  add  some  particulars  not  in  his 
possession.  For  instance,  copies  have  been  preserved 
in  that  repository  of  Pope  John’s  reiterated  exhorta¬ 
tions  to  King  Robert  that  he  should  hasten  to  make 
peace  with  Edward,  so  that  he  (Robert)  might  be 
free  to  undertake  another  crusade.  Then  the  dis¬ 
puted  right  of  Robert  de  Brus  to  the  title  of  King 
of  Scots  leads  to  a  lengthy  correspondence.  First 
Pope  John  scolds  the  Cardinals  for  not  informing  him 
clearly  whether  King  Edward  has  consented  to  his 
addressing  Robert  as  King.  As  the  Pope  observes 
that  Robert  has  assumed  the  title,  he  is  afraid  its 
omission  may  hinder  the  negotiations  for  peace, 
therefore  he  begs  King  Edward  not  to  be  offended 
if  he  uses  it  in  his  correspondence  with  Robert. 
Next,  the  Pope  writes  to  Robert,  explaining  why 
he  had  omitted  the  title  in  former  letters,  begging 
him  not  to  take  it  amiss,  for  that,  in  truth,  it  did  not 
affect  the  validity  of  his  claim  one  way  or  another. 
Finally  he  dispatches  a  letter  to  Edward,  telling  him 
that  inasmuch  as  Robert  positively  refuses  to  re¬ 
ceive  any  letters  except  those  addressed  to  him  as 
King  of  Scots,  he  has  adopted  that  style  in  writing 
to  him  and  again  begs  that  he  will  not  take  it 
amiss.* 

King  Edward,  though  very  ill  prepared  for  war, 


*  Papal  Letters ,  vol.  ii. ,  passim. 


1319  A.D.] 


Continued  Success. 


255 


owing  to  his  quarrel  with  Lancaster  and  other  diffi¬ 
culties,  was  not  ready  to  yield  the  point  about  King 
Robert’s  title.  On  October  6th  he  issued  a  procla¬ 
mation,  strictly  forbidding  all  jousts,  tournaments, 
and  knight-errantry,  in  order  that  all  energies  should 
be  concentrated  on  the  Scottish  war.  The  King  of 
Scots,  on  his  part,  pushed  forward  preparations  for 
the  siege  of  Berwick.  The  mayor  and  burgesses 
of  that  town  had  undertaken  to  defend  it  for  a  year 
from  June  15,  1317,  receiving  for  that  purpose  the 
sum  of  6000  marks  from  the  English  exchequer,  and 
giving  hostages  for  the  faithful  performance  of  the 
wo*rk.*  But  Sir  Roger  de  Horsley  was  governor  of 
the  castle,  a  knight  who  hated  all  Scotsmen,  whether 
loyal  to  King  Edward  or  not  ;  and  the  rough  way  in 
which  he  showed  his  feelings  soon  brought  about 
mischief  between  him  and  the  townsfolk.f  A  cer¬ 
tain  burgess  of  Berwick,  Simon  of  Spalding  by 
name,  resenting  de  Horsley’s  rudeness,  wrote  privily 
to  the  Earl  of  March  offering,  on  a  given  night  when 
he,  Simon,  should  be  on  guard,  to  admit  an  escalad- 
ing  party  over  the  wall.  March  showed  the  letter  in 
confidence  to  King  Robert,  who  thanked  him  for 
doing  so,  observing  that,  if  the  earl  had  gone  either 
to  Douglas  or  to  Moray  he  would  have  roused  the 
jealousy  of  the  other.  There  is  a  hint  here  of  that 
risk  which  always  beset  military  undertakings  on  a 


*  Bain,  iii.,  107. 

f  In  making  this  allegation,  Barbour  is  amply  confirmed  by  a  com¬ 
mission  granted  by  King  Edward  (February  4,  1318),  to  enquire 
into  the  disputes  between  the  burgesses  and  the  garrison — (Bain,  iii., 
1 12). 


256 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1316  A.D.- 


feudal  basis,  before  professional  seniority  was  estab¬ 
lished  as  the  measure  of  responsibility.  Douglas  and 
Moray  both  served  King  Robert  nobly  and  well,  but 
it  was  perhaps  owing  to  the  King’s  tact  in  adjusting 
the  orbits  of  two  such  stars  in  one  small  firmament 
that  they  never  came  into  collision. 

The  King  directed  March  to  conceal  his  men  at 
Duns,  where  Douglas  and  Moray  were  sent  to  meet 
him.  From  Duns  they  marched  together  to  Ber¬ 
wick,  duly  provided  with  scaling-ladders,  climbed 
the  wall  with  Spalding’s  assistance,  and  obtained 
easy  possession  of  the  town,  though  the  castle  re¬ 
mained  in  the  hands  of  the  garrison.  A  party  of  Scots 
was  told  off  for  purposes  of  plunder,  the  rest  being 
kept  under  arms  with  their  officers.  But  this  proved 
too  great  a  trial  for  the  discipline  of  these  wild  sol¬ 
diers.  They  broke  away,  and  soon  almost  the  whole 
force  was  scattered  through  the  streets  collecting 
booty. 

Their  disobedience  nearly  brought  about  their  ruin. 
At  daylight  (it  was  on  March  28,  1318)  the  governor 
of  the  castle,  perceiving  the  state  of  affairs,  how 
Douglas  and  Moray  had  been  left  with  a  mere 
handful  of  men,  ordered  an  immediate  sortie.  The 
Scottish  chiefs  were  only  saved  from  capture,  and 
their  troops  from  slaughter  in  detail,  by  the  activity 
and  presence  of  mind  shown  by  a  young  knight,  Sir 
William  de  Keith  of  Galston,  who  rode  through  the 
town  recalling  the  soldiers  to  their  standards.  He 
succeeded  in  bringing  them  to  a  sense  of  their  posi¬ 
tion  ;  the  English  were  driven  back  ;  but  the  castle 
continued  to  hold  out  for  no  less  than  sixteen  weeks, 


1319  A.D.] 


Continued  Success. 


257 


when  the  garrison  was  compelled  to  surrender  through 
famine.*  Sir  Roger,  who  made  such  a  gallant 
defence,  lost  an  eye. 

One  of  the  garrison  of  Berwick  Castle,  Robert  de 
Blackburn,  who  had  lost  his  brother  and  “  all  his 
friends  ”  at  Bannockburn,  deserves  mention  for  a 
brave  deed  performed  during  the  siege.  He  swam 
the  Tweed  on  horseback  with  letters  to  King  Ed¬ 
ward,  and  leading  a  string  of  twenty-one  horses,  all 
of  which  he  avers  in  his  petition  to  the  King  that 
he  took  safely  to  Newcastle.f 

The  King  of  England  was  furious  at  the  loss  of 
the  town  of  Berwick,  accusing  the  burgesses  of 
treachery.  While  the  castle  was  still  holding  out,  he 
ordered  such  property  in  England  as  belonged  to 
the  towns  people  to  be  confiscated,^  and  imprisoned 
those  unlucky  citizens  who  escaped  from  the  town 
to  take  refuge  in  England. § 

During  the  siege  of  Berwick  Castle  a  Scottish  army 
invaded  Northumberland  as  far  as  Newcastle.  Wark 
and  Harbottle  were  surrendered  to  them  on  the  fail¬ 
ure  of  relief  appearing  at  the  stipulated  times  ; 


*  Barbour  says  the  castle  held  out  only  six  days  after  the  town  had 
been  taken,  and  Hailes,  commenting  on  the  statement  in  Scalacron- 
ica  that  it  resisted  for  eleven  weeks,  remarks  that  the  invasion  of 
England  in  May  by  the  Scots  renders  this  “altogether  incredible.” 
Nevertheless,  de  Horsley’s  acknowledgment  of  sustenance  received 
for  his  garrison  after  he  had  surrendered  runs  from  July  20th  to 
August  24th,  which,  taken  in  connection  with  other  documents,  seems 
conclusive  (Bain,  iii.,  113,  115). 

t  Bain,  iii.,  118.  The  endorsement  of  this  petition  is  not  of  the 
best  augury  for  its  fulfilment:  “the  King  will  speak  with  thfc 
treasurer.”  \Ibid .,  113.  %Ibid.,  114. 

17 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1316  A.D.- 


i 


Mitford  was  taken  by  stratagem.*  A  still  more  de¬ 
structive  raid  was  made  in  May,  in  which  York¬ 
shire  suffered  most;  Northallerton,  Boroughbridge, 
Knaresborough,  and  Skipton  being  burnt,  and  the 
town  of  Ripon  escaping  on  the  payment  of  1000 
marks.  The  tower  of  Knaresborough  church  re¬ 
tains  to  this  day  the  marks  of  flames,  kindled,  it  is 
supposed,  to  burn  out  the  people  who  had  taken 
refuge  there.f 

William  de  Melton,  the  new  Archbishop  of  York, 
bestirred  aimself  too  late  to  resist  this  infanda  in- 
vasio  Scotorum ,  as  he  termed  it.  It  was  not  till 
June  4th,  after  the  mischief  had  been  wrought,  that 
he  summoned  the  Abbot  and  Convent  of  St.  Mary’s, 
York,  to  array  their  tenants  and  servants,  and  bring 
them  to  the  army  then  assembling  in  the  archiepisco- 
pal  city 4  The  Scots  got  home  safe,  carrying  with 
them  many  prisoners  and  a  vast  number  of  cattle, 
and  caring  little,  it  may  be  supposed,  for  the  an¬ 
athema  of  excommunication,  wholesale  and  indi¬ 
vidual — omnes  et  singulos — which  the  infuriated 
Primate  hurled  after  them.§ 

The  good  people  of  Hartlepool  fell  into  great  trep¬ 
idation  at  this  time,  because  King  Robert,  in  selling 
a  truce  to  the  bishopric  of  Durham,  had  expressly 
excepted  their  town,  which  he  vowed  he  meant  to 
burn  in  reprisal  for  the  taking  of  a  ship  laden  with 
his  “  armeours  ”  and  victual.  They  sent  in  hot  haste 
to  King  Edward,  begging  his  help  to  build  a  city 
wall.  He  forwarded  the  somewhat  meagre  subscrip- 

%  Raine,  275. 

§  Ibid. ,  277. 


*  Lanercost,  235. 

\  Raine,  Introduction,  xxvii. 


1319  A.D.] 


Continued  Success . 


259 


tion  of  100  marks  (about  £60)  and  told  them  to 
hurry  on  the  works.* 

By  this  time  the  two  Cardinals  had  reported  to  the 
Pope  the  failure  of  their  mission  and  the  refusal  of 
Robert  de  Brus  to  receive  the  papal  letters,  unless 
addressed  to  him  as  King  of  Scots.  The  Pope  de¬ 
clared  such  a  result  completely  dazed  him— nec  sine 
stupore  miramur.  Being  very  impatient  for  the 
undertaking  of  a  new  crusade,  he  commanded  the 
prayers  of  all  the  faithful  to  be  made  to  Him  “  to 
whom  nothing  is  impossible,”  for  the  restoration  of 
peace  ;  and,  inasmuch  as  curses,  even  on  the  most 
magnificent  scale,  cost  no  more  than  the  price  of  a 
sheet  of  parchment  and  a  wax  candle,  the  Cardinals 
were  directed  to  excommunicate  Robert  de  Brus  and 
all  his  abettors. 

The  English  army  assembled  at  York  early  in 
June,  1318,  in  order  to  recapture  the  town  of  Ber¬ 
wick  ;  but  the  troops  had  no  sooner  come  together 
than  they  had  to  be  disbanded,  because  of  the 
disagreements  and  mutual  distrust  of  their  com- 
manders.f 

On  October  5,  1318,  Edward  de  Brus,  titular  King 
of  Ireland,  died  on  the  fatal  field  of  Dundalk.^  This 

*  Bain,  iii.,  114. 

f  Suborto  tumultu  pariter  et  simultate  cum  aliis  impedimentis. 
— Walsingham. 

X  Barbour  relates  a  curious  story  about  Edward  de  Brus’s  death. 
He  says  that  Edward  exchanged  armour  that  morning  with  one  Gib 
Harper  ;  that  Gib  was  slain  and  that  the  conquerors  cut  off  his  head, 
believing  it  to  be  the  King  of  Ireland’s,  and  sent  it  to  King  Edward. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  a  knight,  in  exchanging  armour  with 
one  of  inferior  degree,  incurred  the  greater  risk  of  death  ;  for  the 


26o 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1316  A.D.- 


event  not  only  put  an  end  to  the  interference  of 
the  Scots  in  Irish  affairs,  but  it  reopened  the  far  more 
pressing  question  of  the  succession  to  the  throne  of 
Scotland.  Parliament  was  called  together  at  Scone 
in  December,  1318,  and  the  inheritance  was  settled 
on  Robert,  the  only  son  of  Walter  the  Stewart  and 
the  deceased  Princess  Marjorie,  always  saving  any 
male  issue  which  the  King  might  have  subsequently. 
The  Earl  of  Moray  again  was  designated  guardian 
in  the  event  of  a  minority  ;  and,  failing  him,  Dou¬ 
glas.  But  such  guardianship  was  to  cease,  on  its  ap¬ 
pearing  to  the  community,  or  to  the  greater  or  wiser 
part  thereof *  *  that  the  young  King  was  capable  of 
assuming  the  government. 

Some  of  the  other  Acts  passed  by  this  Parlia¬ 
ment  proved  of  lasting  effect  on  the  judicial  code  of 
Scotland  ;  but  those  which  were  chiefly  directed  at 
the  circumstances  of  the  time  were  those  establish¬ 
ing  the  liberties  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  (includ¬ 
ing,  of  course,  benefit  of  clergy);  prescribing  armour 
and  weapons  to  be  provided  by  all  men  according  to 
their  condition  ;f  forbidding  all  trade  with  England 

prospect  of  ransom  made  it  ever  more  desirable  to  capture,  than  to 
kill,  eminent  persons.  Among  other  Scottish  notables  slain  on  this 
day  were  Sir  John  de  Soulis,  John,  brother  of  Walter  the  Stewart, 
and  Sir  Philip  de  Moubray,  the  defender  of  Stirling.  John  de  Ber- 
mingham,  the  English  general,  was  created  Earl  of  Louth,  and  was 
granted  ^20  a  year  for  his  services. 

*  Quoniam  communitati  regni,  vel  majori  et  saniori  parti 
visum.  Hailes  explains  this  suggestive  phrase  as  being  merely  a 
periphrasis  for  the  majority,  on  the  ground  that  any  other  interpreta¬ 
tion  would  be  impracticable. 

f  Every  lay  landowner  worth  ten  pounds  in  goods  was  bound, 
under  penalty  of  forfeiture,  to  have  an  acton  (leather  jacket),  a  bassi- 


1319  A.D.] 


Continued  Success. 


261 


on  pain  of  death  ;  restraining  the  clergy  from  send¬ 
ing  money  to  the  Pope  for  the  purchase  of  Bulls, 
and  constituting  as  an  offence  “  lease-making,”  or  the 
invention  of  rumours  calculated  to  disturb  the  rela¬ 
tions  between  the  sovereign  and  his  people.  It  is 
amusing  to  find  that,  even  at  such  a  critical  time, 
Parliament  was  as  ready  in  the  14th  century  to  legis¬ 
late  about  salmon  fishing  as  it  remains  in  the  19th. 

The  inefficiency  which  crippled  the  military  pro¬ 
jects  of  England,  was  not  apparent  in  her  conti¬ 
nental  diplomacy.  The  trade  between  Scotland  and 
the  Low  Countries  had  endured  since  the  days  of 
William  the  Lion  and  probably  from  earlier  times.* * 
Wool,  fish,  hides,  and  a  few  other  native  commodi¬ 
ties,  were  exported  in  exchange  for  wine,  arms, 
cloth,  and  other  goods.  It  was  now  the  policy  of  the 
English  Government  to  persuade  the  Count  of  Flan¬ 
ders  to  close  his  ports  to  Scotsmen.  The  Count’s 
reply  was  firm  and  statesmanlike.  He  said  that  his 
country  was  open  to  all  men,  and  he  declined  to  in¬ 
jure  his  own  people  by  excluding  any  merchants  who 
had  been  in  the  custom  of  trading  there.  A  similar 
answer  was  returned  by  the  town  council  of  Bruges.f 

King  Edward  was  busy  also  at  this  time  intrig¬ 
uing,  under  the  Pope’s  sanction,  with  certain  barons 

net  (helmet),  a  plate  glove,  sword,  and  spear,  or,  failing  these,  a  good 
habergeon  (mail  shirt),  an  iron  cuirass,  with  an  iron  helmet  and 
plate  gloves.  Every  man  owning  the  value  of  a  cowin  goods  to  have 
a  bow  and  24  arrows,  or  a  spear. 

*  About  1182,  Philip,  Count  of  Flanders,  granted  a  charter  to  the 
monk  of  Melrose,  exempting  their  traders  from  any  toll  or  duty  on 
land  or  sea. 

f  Bain,  iii.,  130. 


262 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1316-19  A.D. 


and  others  of  influence  in  the  Scottish  King’s  ser¬ 
vice,  who  he  had  reason  to  expect  were  inclined  to 
revert  to  their  former  allegiance  to  himself.*  In  this 
may  be  traced  the  source  of  the  formidable  conspir¬ 
acy  against  King  Robert  to  be  disclosed  in  the  fol¬ 
lowing  year.  The  Pope  co-operated  with  Edward 
by  writing  a  letter  on  April  25th  to  the  English 
bishops,  empowering  them  to  release  from  excom¬ 
munication  all  Scotsmen  who  should  return  to  their 
allegiance  to  the  King  of  England,  f 

*  Hailes,  ii.,  109,  note. 

f  Raine,  286. 


Sir  Walter  the  Steward. 


Sir  Thomas  Gray  of  Hetoun. 


CHAPTER  XIT. 

INVASION  AND  COUNTER-INVASION. 

A.D.  1319-1322. 

NORHAM  Castle,  a  border  fortress  of  great 
strength  and  importance  on  the  south  bank 
of  the  Tweed,  was  held  for  the  English  dur¬ 
ing  eleven  stormy  years  by  Sir  Thomas  Gray  of 
Heton.  The  son  of  that  knight  tells  us,  in  his 
Scalacronica,  that  it  would  be  tedious  to  recount  all 
the  exploits  and  hardships  of  which  it  was  the  scene. 
The  stories  he  does  permit  himself  to  tell  are  of  a 
sort  that  make  one  regret  his  reticence.  Here  is 
one  of  them. 

Sir  William  Marmion,  a  knight  of  Lincolnshire, 
was  feasting  with  some  other  knights  and  ladies, 
when  there  was  brought  to  him  from  his  lady-love  a 
gilt  helmet  and  crest,  together  with  her  commands 
that  he  should  take  her  gift  to  the  most  perilous 
place  in  Britain,  and  there  make  it  famous.  It  was 
decided  by  the  company  present,  to  whom  Marmion 
referred  the  question,  that  there  was  no  place  like 

263 


264 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1319  A.D.' 


Norham  for  feats. of  chivalry;  and  thither,  accord- 
ingly,  Sir  William  took  his  way.  He  had  not  long 
to  wait  for  adventure,  for  just  as  he  was  sitting  down 
to  dinner  at  noon,  on  the  fourth  day  after  his 
arrival,  appeared  Sir  Alexander  de  Moubray  *  with 
some  other  knights  and  160  men-at-arms.  Sir 
Thomas  Gray  had  already  formed  up  his  garrison, 
for  defence,  when  he  noticed  Marmion  on  foot,  shin¬ 
ing  with  gold  and  silver — tout  relusaunt  dor  et  dargent 
— and  wearing  his  gold  helmet. 

u  Sir  knight,  *  said  Sir  Thomas,  “  you  have  come 
hither  a  knight  errant  to  make  famous  your  helmet. 
It  is  more  fitting  that  chivalry  be  done  on  horse¬ 
back  than  on  foot,  where  that  is  possible ;  therefore 
mount  your  charger.  See!  there  is  the  enemy ;  set 
spurs  to  your  horse  and  charge  among  them.  I  re¬ 
nounce  God  if  I  do  not  rescue  you  dead  or  alive,  or 
perish  in  the  attempt.” 

Marmion  did  not  blanch.  He  mounted  a  splen¬ 
did  war-horse — vn  bet  destreir — and  charged  alone 
against  the  Scots.  Wounded,  he  was  thrown  to  the 
ground  and  was  at  the  point  of  being  slain,  when 
Gray,  charging  on  foot  with  all  his  men,  rescued  the 
knight  as  he  had  pledged  himself  to  do.  Then  the 
ladies  in  the  castle  led  their  horses  out  to  Sir  Thomas 
and  his  men,  who  mounted  and  rode  in  pursuit 
of  the  flying  Scots,  killing  many  of  them  and  taking 
fifty  valuable  horses — cheualx  de  pris.  It  is  to  be 
hoped  that  Marmion  earned  his  lady’s  favour,  in  spite 

*  Brother  of  Sir  Philip,  killed  at  Dundalk.  Afterwards  he  went 
over  to  the  English  side,  on  the  conviction  of  Roger  de  Moubray  of 
high  treason,  in  August,  1320,  and  received  King  Edward’s  pardon. 
— Bain,  iii. ,  136,  435. 


1322  A.D.]  Invasion  and  Counter- Invasion .  265 


of  the  injuries  he  received.  It  is  recorded  that  the 
Scots  “  made  shipwreck  of  his  features  ” — ly  nau- 
frerent  hu  visage. 

In  the  spring  of  1319,  King  Edward,  having  com¬ 
posed  for  the  time  his  quarrel  with  the  Earl  of 
Lancaster,*  resumed  preparations  for  the  recapture 
of  Berwick.  He  issued  orders  for  the  muster  of  a 
powerful  army  at  Newcastle  on  July  24th.  The 
pay-sheets,  preserved  in  the  Tower,  furnish  exact 
information  of  the  strength  of  the  land  forces, 
amounting  to  120  cross-bowmen,  1520  archers,  3000 
English  foot  and  2400  Welsh,  and  1040  hobelars 
(light  horse)  ;  in  all,  8080  men.f  Besides  these, 
there  must  be  reckoned  the  King’s  bodyguard,  as 
well  as  the  numerous  knights  and  their  personal  ret¬ 
inues,  bringing  the  total  to  at  least  12,000  of  all  ranks. 
The  unlucky  Earl  of  Pembroke  was  there  ;  also  Um- 
fraville,  Earl  of  Angus,  and  such  well-known  captains 
as  Sir  Anthony  de  Lucy,  Sir  Andrew  de  Harcla  (who 
had  regained  his  liberty),  and  Sir  Hugh  de  Lowther. 
Of  the  numbers  on  board  the  fleet  no  record  has  been 
preserved.  To  help  King  Edward  to  defray  the  ex¬ 
pense  of  this  expedition,  the  Pope  authorised  the 
Archbishop  of  York  to  advance  to  him  ,£2505  14^. 

1  d.  out  of  the  funds  collected  for  the  crusade  J — 
significant  evidence  of  the  eagerness  of  his  Holiness 
for  the  success  of  the  English  arms. 

*  Raine,  290. 

fBain,  iii.,  125.  The  pay  from  August  1st  to  September  24th 
amounted  to  ^3048  3^.  The  Earl  of  Lancaster  had  been  summoned 
with  2000  men,  but  his  name  does  not  appear  on  the  pay-sheet. 
Barbour,  however,  says  he  was  present  at  the  siege. 

\  Raine,  310. 


266 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1319  A.D.- 


King  Robert  had  committed  the  custody  of  war¬ 
worn  Berwick  into  the  capable  hands  of  Walter 
the  Steward,  who  had  diligently  strengthened  the 
defences,  and  provisioned  the  castle  against  all 
emergency.  The  English  army  invested  the  town, 
forming  entrenchments  round  their  own  lines,  and 
filling  the  harbour  with  their  ships.  On  September 
7th  a  general  assault  took  place.  The  city  walls,  in 
spite  of  the  great  strategic  value  of  this  place,  were 
so  low,  says  Barbour,  that  a  spearman  on  the  top 
could  strike  an  assailant  outside  in  the  face  with  his 
weapon.  The  garrison,  therefore,  had  a  busy  time 
throwing  down  the  scaling-ladders  of  the  enemy. 
In  the  afternoon  a  vessel  was  towed  up  the  river  on 
the  flood  tide,  as  far  as  the  bridge-house,  and  an 
attempt  was  made  to  make  her  fast  to  the  wall. 
She  carried  a  fall-bridge,  whereby  it  was  intended  to 
enter  the  town.  But  she  was  kept  at  bay  till,  with 
the  falling  tide,  she  took  the  ground,  when  the  gar¬ 
rison  made  a  sortie  and  set  her  on  fire.  The  fight¬ 
ing  went  on  all  day,  until  towards  evening  the 
English  were  recalled  to  their  lines,  and  nothing 
further  was  attempted  for  five  days. 

The  Scots  in  Berwick  found  a  most  valuable  as¬ 
sistant  in  the  person  of  one  John  Crab,  a  Flemish 
engineer.  Barbour  says  that  he  was  one  of  the 
prisoners  taken  in  the  English  ship  burnt  at  the 
bridge,  but  this  is  disproved  by  a  correspondence 
which  took  place  earlier  in  the  same  year  between 
King  Edward  and  the  Count  of  Flanders,  of  which 
Crab  was  the  subject.  He  had,  it  seems,  committed 
some  acts  of  piracy  on  English  shipping,  and  the 
Count  assured  Edward  that  if  he  could  catch  the 


1322  a.d.i  Invasion  and  Counter-Invasion.  267 


fellow,  he  would  break  him  on  the  wheel.*  To  the 
Scots,  however,  he  proved  the  means  of  saving  Ber¬ 
wick.  The  English  employed  themselves  in  con¬ 
structing  a  huge  engine  called  the  Sow,  moving, 
like  a  modern  fire-escape,  on  wheels,  and  devised  to 
land  a  storming  party  on  the  top  of  the  walls  and  at 
the  same  time  as  it  conveyed  a  mining  party  to  the 
bottom.  To  match  this,  Crab  made  a  crane— a  kind 
of  catapult — also  on  wheels,  by  means  of  which  not 
only  heavy  stones  but  burning  faggots  could  be  dis¬ 
charged  on  the  Sow. 

At  dawn  on  September  13th  the  English  trumpets 
sounded  the  advance  ;  the  mighty  Sow  crawled  for¬ 
ward  to  the  walls,  the  protecting  crane  rolled  along 
the  ramparts  to  meet  it,  while  storming  parties 
clambered  the  defences  at  different  points. 

It  was  a  moment  of  critical  anxiety. 

Crab  was  warned  that  if  he  failed  to  disable  the 
Sow  he  should  be  put  to  death  instantly.  Thus  set 
on  his  mettle,  the  crafty  Fleming  caused  a  large 
stone  to  be  put  in  his  engine.  Taking  a  careful 
aim,  he  touched  the  trigger,  releasing  the  missile, 
which  flew  hurtling  over  the  Sow,  and  fell  harmlessly 
behind  it.f  The  enemy  inside  the  monster  loudly 

*  Bain,  iii.,  126.  This  must  be  the  same  individual  mentioned  in 
Scalacronica  as  having  been  taken  and  killed  by  the  elder  Gray  be¬ 
tween  Norham  and  Berwick.  “  Thomas  de  Gray  fist  tuer  en  le  Yar- 
forde,  Cryn,  vn  Flemyng,  vn  amirail  de  la  mere,  vn  robbour,  qi 
grant  meistre  estoit  od  Robert  de  Bruys.” 

f  “  In  hy  he  gert  draw  the  cleket 

And  smertly  swappit  out  the  stane. 

That  even  out  our  the  Sow  is  gane, 

And  behind  hir  ane  litil  we 
It  fell.” 


—  The  Brus ,  cxxx.,  86. 


268 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1319  A.D.~ 


cheered.  The  Sow  continued  to  approach.  Crab’s 
next  shot  fell  short,  and  the  Sow  was  touching  the 
wall  before  a  third  could  be  made  ready.  This  time 
the  engineer  took  better  aim.  The  great  stone 
crashed  into  the  frame-work  of  the  machine  ;  the  in¬ 
mates  tumbled  out  in  confusion.  It  was  the  turn  of 
the  Scots  to  cheer  now.  “  Your  Sow  has  farrowed  !  ” 
they  cried,  and  Crab  piled  blazing  material  on  the 
disabled  engine,  whereby  it  was  soon  reduced  to  ashes. 

No  sooner  had  that  danger  been  disposed  of  than 
need  arose  for  Crab’s  crane  at  another  part  of  the 
defences.  An  English  ship,  with  her  fortified  tops 
full  of  men,  drew  close  under  the  wall ;  but  a  well 
directed  shot  from  the  crane  brought  down  her  top 
hamper,  and  with  it  all  the  sharp-shooters  posted 
therein. 

All  this  time  Sir  Walter  the  Steward  was  riding 
about  from  point  to  point,  superintending  the  de¬ 
fence.  Of  his  bodyguard,  originally  one  hundred 
strong,  only  one  man-at-arms  remained  with  him  : 
the  rest  had  been  detached  for  service  on  the  ram¬ 
parts  as  occasion  arose.  Word  was  brought  to  Sir 
Walter  that  the  English  had  forced  a  barricade  out¬ 
side  the  Mary  Gate,  and  were  about  to  fire  the  gate 
itself.  He  called  out  the  reserve  from  the  castle, 
where  there  had  been  no  fighting,  and  drew  them 
up  behind  the  threatened  gate.  Then,  causing  the 
gate  to  be  thrown  open  suddenly,  he  and  his  men 
dashed  through  the  fire  and  fell  upon  the  English 
with  such  fury  that  they  gave  way.  Night  came 
at  last,  to  put  an  end  to  a  long  day  of  hard  fighting, 
the  Scots  having  made  good  their  defence. 


1322  a.d.i  Invasion  and  Counter -Invasion .  269 


Notwithstanding  the  successful  repulse  of  the 
enemy,  the  Steward  must  have  been  forced  in  the 
end  to  yield  through  famine,  for  the  King  of  Scots 
was  not  strong  enough  to  attack  the  English  trenches 
and  relieve  the  beleaguered  town.  But  Robert  was 
not  going  to  leave  his  brave  son-in-law  to  his  fate. 
He  had  already  taken  measures  to  create  a  diversion 
by  invading  England.  Douglas  and  Moray  crossed 
the  west  Marshes,  with  the  design,  as  Walsingham 
says,  of  taking  prisoner  the  Queen  of  England, 
then  living  in  York,  and  holding  her  as  a  hostage 
for  the  safety  of  Berwick.  In  this  they  did  not 
succeed,  but  they  overran  Yorkshire,  even  as  far  as 
the  suburbs  of  York  itself. 

Warlike  Archbishop  Melton  did  his  best.  He 
collected  all  the  forces  the  neighbourhood  could 
furnish,  ecclesiastics  as  well  as  laymen,  and  met 
the  Scots  at  Myton-on-Swale,  on  September  20th. 
The  result  was  as  might  have  been  expected  :  the 
trained  veterans  of  Douglas  and  Moray  put  the 
motley  crowd  to  flight  at  the  first  onset.  The  Arch¬ 
bishop’s  levies  made  such  a  poor  show  of  resistance 
that  men,  in  derision,  called  that  affair  the  Chapter 
of  Myton.  So  heavy  were  the  Archbishop’s  losses, 
that  he  had  to  issue  a  plaintive  appeal  to  thirty-one 
abbeys  and  priories  in  the  north  for  pecuniary  help. 
His  servants  stupidly  had  taken  his  plate  to  Myton 
with  the  troops,  where  it  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
Scots,  together  with  all  his  carriages  and  other 
movables.* 

But  the  most  important  result  of  this  spirited  foray 


*  Raine,  295. 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


11319  A.D.- 


270 


was  its  effect  on  the  besiegers  of  Berwick.  The  strat¬ 
egy  of  the  King  of  Scots  was  justified  by  its  com¬ 
plete  success.  King  Edward  could  not  allow  a  vic¬ 
torious  army  to  career  at  will  through  his  dominions. 
Whether  there  be  truth  or  not  in  the  allegations  of 
fresh  dissensions  between  Lancaster  and  le  Despenser, 
the  fact  that  the  siege  of  Berwick  was  raised  on  or 
before  September  24th  is  established  by  the  pay-roll 
of  the  army,  above  referred  to,  coming  to  an  end  on 
that  day,  when  the  bulk  of  the  forces  were  paid  off. 

It  was  now  more  than  thirteen  years  since  Robert 
de  Brus,  an  excommunicated  assassin  and  proclaimed 
rebel,  had  been  crowned  King  of  Scots,  and  then  had 
to  fly  from  the  pursuit  of  the  whole  armed  force  of  both 
kingdoms.  Now,  the  whole  of  Scotland  owned  him  as 
King ;  he  possessed  every  inch  of  its  soil ;  his  so-called 
Overlord  had  been  driven  twice  across  the  Border, 
after  bringing  all  the  power  at  his  command,  military, 
diplomatic,  and  spiritual,  to  bear  on  the  subjugation 
of  the  smaller  and  weaker  country.  Beaten,  dis¬ 
heartened  and  distracted  by  the  feuds  of  his  barons, 
Edward  seemed  finally  brought  to  his  knees,  and 
sent  commissioners  to  treat  for  peace.  The  embas¬ 
sage  consisted  of  the  Bishop  of  Ely,  the  Earl  of 
Pembroke  (it  must  have  been'  a  bitter  duty  for  him 
to  discharge!),  Hugh  le  Despenser  the  younger,  and 
Bartholemew  de  Badlesmere.*  To  confer  with  these 
King  Robert  appointed  five  plenipotentiaries — no 
bishop,  perhaps  because  he  was  lying  under  the  ban  of 
the  Church — Sir  William  de  Soulis,  Sir  Robert  de 


*Bain,  iii.,  129. 


1322  a.d.]  Invasion  and  Counter- Invasion.  271 


Keith,  Sir  Roger  de  Kirkpatrick,  Sir  Alexander  de 
Seton,  and  Sir  William  de  MontfichetA  Terms  of 
truce  were  agreed  to  between  the  commissioners  on 
December  21,  1319,  and  ratified  by  King  Robert  at 
Berwick  on  the  following  day.f  It  was  to  endure  for 
two  years  from  St.  Thomas’s  Day,  King  Robert 
undertaking  on  his  part,  to  erect  no  new  fortresses 
within  the  shires  of  Berwick,  Roxburgh,and  Dumfries ; 
while  King  Edward  consented  to  deliver  Harbottle 
Castle  to  the  Scots,  or  else  to  destroy  it.J 

Meanwhile  the  Pope  continued  to  act  vigorously 
in  Edward’s  interest,  probably  not  having  foreseen 
the  speedy  collapse  of  the  latest  invasion  of  Scotland. 
In  October,  1319,  he  issued  fresh  instructions  for 
the  excommunication  of  the  much-execrated  King 
of  Scots,  unmindful,  apparently,  of  the  fact  that  the 
more  curses  had  been  heaped  on  the  Bruce,  the  more 
constantly  fortune  had  smiled  on  his  arms.  This 
new  sentence  was  not  put  into  immediate  execution, 
for,  on  January  8,  1320,  the  Pope  summoned  “the 
noble  man  Robert  de  Brus,  governing  the  Kingdom 
of  Scotland,”  §  to  appear,  with  the  prelates  of  Scot¬ 
land,  at  his  court  at  Avignon. 

To  this  summons  King  Robert  paid  no  attention, 
because,  although  it  was  accompanied  by  a  safe  con¬ 
duct,  it  was  not  addressed  to  him  as  King.  There¬ 
fore  the  Archbishop  of  York  and  the  Bishop  of 

*  The  name  Montfichet  has  assumed  the  homely  disguise  of  Mushat 
in  modern  Scots. 

f  Bain,  iii.,  129. 

%Ibid.,  131.  It  was  dismantled. 

§  Nobilem  virum,  Robertum  de  Brus,  regnum  Scotise  gubernantem. 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1319  A.D.- 


273 


London  and  Carlisle  received  the  papal  mandate  to 
publish  the  sentence  of  excommunication  without 
further  delay,  coupled  with  the  injunction  that  Bruce 
was  on  no  account  to  be  released  from  it,  until  he 
should  be  at  the  point  of  death.*  A  few  months 
later,  on  July  20,  1320,  the  Bishops  of  St.  Andrews, 
Dunkeld,  Aberdeen,  and  Moray  were  also  excom¬ 
municated  for  contumacy,  forasmuch  as  they,  too, 
had  neglected  the  Pope’s  summons  to  Avignon. 
But  in  the  meantime  the  Pope  had  received  his 
answer  from  the  Scottish  nation.  The  laymen  in 
Parliament  at  Arbroath  had  drawn  up  and  forwarded 
their  celebrated  letter  to  John  XXII. 

The  preamble  of  this  document  recites  the  mythi¬ 
cal  origin  of  the  Scots  from  Scythia  and  Spain,  and 
claims  for  Scotland  the  special  favour  of  the  See  of 
Rome,  as  being  under  the  patronage  of  St.  Andrew, 
the  brother  of  St.  Peter.  Then  the  practical  case  for 
Scotland  is  set  forth  in  clear  and  eloquent  terms. 

“  We  continued  to  enjoy  peace  and  liberty,  with  the  protection  of 
the  Papal  See,  until  Edward,  the  late  King  of  England,  in  the  guise 
of  a  friend  and  ally,  invaded  and  oppressed  our  nation,  at  that  time 
without  a  head,  unpracticed  in  war  and  suspecting  no  evil.  The 
wrongs  which  we  suffered  under  the  tyranny  of  Edward  are  beyond 
description,  and,  indeed,  they  would  appear  incredible  to  all  but 
those  who  actually  felt  them.  He  wasted  our  country,  imprisoned 
our  prelates,  burnt  our  religious  places,  spoiled  our  ecclesiastics,  and 
slew  our  people,  without  discrimination  of  age,  sex,  or  rank.  Through 
favour  of  Him  who  woundeth  and  maketh  whole,  we  have  been  freed 
from  so  great  and  innumerable  calamities  by  the  valour  of  our  Lord 
and  Sovereign  Robert.  He,  like  another  Joshua  or  a  Judas  Macca¬ 
beus,  gladly  endured  toils,  distresses,  the  extremity  of  want,  and  every 


*  Papal  Letters ,  ad  annum. 


!322  a.d.]  Invasion  and  Counter- Invasion,  273 


peril,  to  rescue  his  people  and  inheritance  out  of  the  hands  of  the 
enemy.  The  divine  Providence,  that  legal  succession  which  we  will 
constantly  maintain,  and  our  due  and  unanimous  consent,  have  made 
him  our  Chief  and  King.  To  him,  in  defence  of  our  liberty,  we  are 
bound  to  adhere,  as  well  of  right  as  by  reason  of  his  deserts  ;  and  to 
him  we  will  in  all  things  adhere,  for  through  him  salvation  has  been 
wrought  to  all  our  people.  Should  he  abandon  our  cause,  or  aim  at 
reducing  us  or  our  kingdom  under  the  dominion  of  the  English,  we 
will  instantly  strive  to  expel  him  as  a  common  enemy,  the  subverter 
of  our  rights  and  his  own,  and  we  will  choose  another  king  to  rule 
and  protect  us  :  for,  while  there  exist  a  hundred  of  us,  we  will 
never  submit  to  England.  We  fight  not  for  glory,  wealth,  or 
honour,  but  for  that  liberty  which  no  virtuous  man  shall  survive. 

“  Wherefore  we  most  earnestly  beseech  your  Holiness,  as  the  Vice¬ 
gerent  of  Him  who  giveth  equal  measure  unto  all,  and  with  whom 
there  is  no  distinction,  either  of  persons  or  of  nations,  that  you 
would  behold  with  a  fatherly  eye  the  tribulations  and  distresses  brought 
upon  us  by  the  English,  and  that  you  would  admonish  Edward  to 
content  himself  with  his  own  dominions,  esteemed  in  former  times 
enough  for  seven  kings,  and  allow  us  Scotsmen,  who  dwell  in  a  poor 
and  remote  corner,  and  who  seek  for  nought  but  our  own,  to  remain 
in  peace.  In  order  to  procure  that  peace,  we  are  ready  to  do  any¬ 
thing  that  is  consistent  with  our  national  interests. 

“  Herein  it  behoves  you,  Holy  Father,  to  interpose.  You  behold 
with  what  cruelty  the  Heathen  rages  against  the  Christians  for  the 
chastisement  of  their  sins,  and  that  the  boundaries  of  Christendom  are 
daily  contracted.  How  must  your  memory  suffer  in  after  ages 
should  the  Church  be  diminished  in  glory,  or  receive  reproach  under 
your  administration. 

“  Rouse,  therefore,  the  Christian  princes,  and  call  them  to  the 
rescue  of  Palestine.  They  pretend  that  wars  with  their  neighbours 
hinder  that  enterprise,  but  the  true  cause  of  hindrance  is  that,  in  sub¬ 
duing  their  weaker  neighbours,  they  look  for  less  opposition  and  more 
immediate  profit.  Every  one  knows  and  we  now  declare  it  unto  you 
and  to  all  Christendom,  that  our  King  and  we  are  willing  to  undertake 
the  holy  expedition,  if  Edward  will  permit  us  to  depart  in  peace. 

“  Should  you,  however,  give  too  credulous  ear  to  the  reports  of  our 
enemies,  distrust  the  sincerity  of  our  professions  and  persist  in  favour¬ 
ing  the  English,  to  our  destruction,  we  hold  you  guilty  in  the  sight  of 
18 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1319  A.D. 


274 


the  Most  High,  of  the  loss  of  lives,  the  perdition  of  souls  and  all  the 
other  miserable  consequences  which  may  ensue  from  war  between  the 
two  contending  nations. 

“  Ever  ready,  like  dutiful  children,  to  yield  all  fit  obedience  to 
you,  as  God’s  Vicegerent,  we  commit  our  cause  to  the  protection  of 
the  Supreme  King  and  Judge  :  we  cast  our  cares  on  Him,  and  we 
steadily  trust  that  He  will  inspire  us  with  valour  and  bring  our  enemies 
to  nought.” 

The  absence  of  all  reference  in  this  memorable 
document  to  the  church  and  clergy  of  Scotland  is 
perfectly  intelligible.  For  ecclesiastics  to  have  any 
hand  in  such  plain  speaking  would  have  been  to  pro¬ 
claim  a  schism  within  the  Church  of  Rome  and  thus 
greatly  to  strengthen  the  position  of  England  in  the 
standing  dispute. 

Advantage  was  taken  of  the  truce  to  negotiate 
the  exchange  or  ransom  of  prisoners  on  both  sides. 
Mention  may  be  made  of  a  bargain  for  the  release 
of  one  Peter  Warde  as  being  rather  out  of  the  com¬ 
mon,  and  showing  what  a  long  start  the  North¬ 
umbrian  coal  fields  had  obtained  over  those  of 
Scotland.  On  May  19th,  King  Edward  issued  his 
warrant  to  the  mayor  and  bailiffs  of  Newcastle,  em¬ 
powering  them  to  ship  1000  chalders  of  sea-coal  for 
the  ransom  of  the  said  Peter,  but  not  one  chalder 
more  under  any  pretext.* 

The  Scottish  Parliament  met  again  at  Scone  in 
August  1320,  for  the  despatch  of  business  of  a  very 
pressing  and  painful  kind.  King  Edward’s  agents 
had  succeeded  in  sapping  the  loyalty  of  some  of 
King  Robert’s  trusted  barons,  and  a  serious  conspir¬ 
acy  had  been  discovered,  having,  as  is  supposed,  the 


*  Bain,  iii. ,  132. 


1322  a. D.]  Invasion  and  Counter-Invasion.  275 

object  of  setting  William  de  Soulis  on  the  throne  of 
Scotland,  probably  on  condition  of  his  acknowledg¬ 
ing  the  suzerainty  of  the  King  of  England.* * * § 

A  good  deal  of  mystery  still  hangs  over  this  plot 
and  the  means  of  its  timely  exposure.  Fordun, 
whose  notes  on  this  subject  are  fuller  than  on  most 
others  of  the  time,  says  the  conspiracy  was  betrayed 
to  the  King  by  the  Countess  of  Strathearn.  Barbour 
states  that  it  was  revealed  by  a  lady — “as  I  herd 
say  ” — but  mentions  no  name.  Sir  Thomas  Gray, 
however,  names  Muryoch  (Murdoch)  de  Menteith  as 
the  informer.  Now  this  Murdoch  was  in  the  service 
of  England  from  13 1 1  f  till  1317  f;  he  may  have 
been  employed  as  an  agent  of  King  Edward  to 
negociate  with  the  malcontent  Scottish  barons,  and 
have  betrayed  them  all  to  King  Robert.  He  cer¬ 
tainly  entered  the  Scottish  service,  and  remained  in 
it  till  his  death  at  Dupplin  in  1332,  or  at  Halidon 
Hill  in  1333.  Be  all  this  as  it  may,  the  result  of  the 
trial  before  the  Scone  Parliament  spread  such  a  hor¬ 
ror  through  all  the  land,  that  it  was  known  thereafter 
as  the  Black  Parliament. 

De  Soulis,  who  when  arrested  at  Berwick  had  a 
retinue  of  360  squires  clad  in  his  liveries,  “  outane  § 
knichtis  that  war  joly,”  was  condemned  to  imprison¬ 
ment  for  life  in  Dunbarton  Castle.  A  similar  sen¬ 
tence  was  passed  on  the  Countess  of  Strathearn, 

*  William  was  grandson  of  Nicolas  de  Soulis,  one  of  the  Competi. 
tors  in  1292. 

f  Bain,  iii.,  39. 

X  Ibid.,  103. 

§  Besides. 


276 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1319  A.D.- 


which  seems  to  show  that  she  was  not  the  person 
who  revealed  the  plot.  Sir  Gilbert  de  Malesherbe, 
Sir  John  de  Logie,  and  Richard  Brown,  suffered  death 
as  traitors.  Roger  de  Moubray  died  during  the 
trial,  but  he  was  found  guilty,  and  his  body  was 
condemned  to  be  drawn,  hanged,  and  beheaded. 
The  King,  however,  remitted  this  sentence  and  al¬ 
lowed  his  remains  to  receive  honourable  burial — a 
favour  better  understood  and  appreciated  in  the  days 
of  chivalry  than  it  might  be  in  modern  times.  Sir 
Eustace  de  Maxwell  of  Caerlaverock,  Sir  Walter  de 
Barclay,  sheriff  of  Aberdeen,  Sir  Patrick  Graham, 
Hamelin  de  Troupe,  and  Eustace  de  Rattray,  all  of 
whom  were  arraigned  on  the  charge  of  high  treason, 
were  acquitted.  But  the  fate  which,  of  all  others, 
most  deeply  moved  the  popular  compassion  was  that 
of  Sir  David  de  Brechin,  the  King’s  brother-in-law.* 
It  seems  that  the  conspirators,  after  exacting  an 
oath  of  secrecy  from  him,  had  imparted  to  him  their 
project ;  he  disapproved  of  the  plot,  and  would  not 
join  in  it,  but  neither  would  he  sully  his  knightly 
honour  by  betraying  it.  Such,  at  least,  is  Barbour’s 
explanation  of  a  perplexing  case ;  which,  if  it  be  the 
true  one,  leaves  one  to  wonder  why  the  brave  Sir 
David,  with  a  long  record  of  valuable  service  at  his 
credit,  should  have  been  drawn  and  hanged,  while 
the  chief  conspirator,  de  Soulis,  escaped  the  gallows. 

Barbour,  however,  is  not  an  infallible  authority  on 
this  affair.  He  tries  to  make  out  that  Sir  Ingelram 
de  Umfraville,  who  was  taken  prisoner  at  Bannock- 

*  Lord  Hailes  calls  him  the  King’s  nephew,  but  there  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  more  than  one  Sir  David  de  Brechin. 


1322  a.d.]  Invasion  and  Counter -Invasion.  277 


burn,  had  been  released  on  doing  fealty  to  King 
Robert,  but  was  so  deeply  affected  by  the  fate  of 
his  friend  de  Brechin  that  he  begged  and  obtained 
permission  to  return  to  England.  This  is  incon¬ 
sistent  with  the  fact  that,  on  April  20th,  four  months 
before  de  Brechin’s  trial,  King  Edward  issued  a  safe 
conduct  in  favour  of  Sir  Ingelram,  to  enable  him  to 
pass  through  England  beyond  the  seas  with  a  chap¬ 
lain,  12  squires,  4  vallets,  and  24  grooms;*  and 
further,  that  on  January  26,  1321,  five  months  after 
the  trial,  Edward  issued  another  warrant,  restoring 
Sir  Ingelram  to  his  possessions  in  England,  “  as  he 
had  escaped  from  imprisonment  in  Scotland,  and 
shown  that  he  had  never  left  his  allegiance.”  f 

The  manifesto  addressed  by  the  Scottish  barons 
to  the  Pope  had  not  failed  to  make  some  impression 
on  him,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  tenour  of  a  letter 
which  he  now  addressed  to  King  Edward,  directing 
him  to  make  a  lasting  peace  with  Scotland.  In  this 
letter  he  referred  to  Robert  as  Regentem  regni  Scotice 
(Regent  of  the  Kingdom  of  Scotland),  which  was  a 
marked  advance  on  the  term  gubernantem  which  he 
had  used  earlier  in  the  year.  At  the  same  time  he 
excused  himself  for  having  received  Sir  Edward  de 
Mambuisson  and  Sir  Adam  de  Gordon,  sent  as  am¬ 
bassadors  from  the  King  of  Scots  to  sue  for  the 
repeal  of  the  sentence  of  excommunication.  Edward 
complied  so  far  as  to  appoint  the  Archbishop  of 
York  and  three  others  as  commissioners  to  treat  with 
the  Scots  for  a  permanent  peace,  and  on  September 

*  Bain,  iii. ,  131.  This  was  cancelled  for  one  in  October  following. 

\  Ibid..  136. 


2  Robert  the  Bruce.  [1319  a.d.- 

15th,  ordered  them  to  proceed  to  Carlisle  for  that 
purpose."  But  the  English  Court  was  far  from  re¬ 
signing  hopes  of  creating  disaffection  among  the  sub¬ 
jects  of  King  Robert.  On  November  17th,  King 
Edward  gave  authority  to  the  Earl  of  Athol,  Sir 
Andrew  de  Harcla,  and  others,  to  receive  to  his  peace, 
as  secretly  as  possible ,  those  Scots  who  felt  their 
consciences  troubled  by  the  Papal  excommunica¬ 
tion,  f  and  on  December  11th  he  empowered  the 
Archbishop  of  York  to  release  all  such  persons  from 
excommunication.  Nothing  could  prove  more  dis¬ 
tinctly  the  unscrupulous  use  of  spiritual  powers  by 
the  highest  authorities  in  the  Church  for  purely 
temporal  and  political  ends. 

The  proffered  indulgence  had  but  a  limited  effect. 
On  May  11,  1321,  five  persons  were  proclaimed  so 
absolved  ;  on  February  27th  Sir  Alexander  de  Mou- 
bray,  with  12  “  gentifs  ’  (gentry)  and  17  servants 
were  received  to  King  Edward’s  peace,  J  and  Sir 
William  de  Mohaut  and  a  few  others  followed  later. 
We  know  that  in  this  course  de  Moubray  was  acting 
out  of  resentment  for  the  fate  of  his  kinsman  who 
had  been  implicated  in  the  de  Soulis  conspiracy ; 
personal  motives  may  have  prompted  others  to  do 
the  like  ;  while  there  were  sure  to  be  a  few  timid 
spirits  who  shrank  from  encountering  the  wrath  of 
the  Church,  and  embraced  the  first  chance  of  recon¬ 
ciliation  with  her.  But  as  a  whole  the  Scottish 
nation  did  not  waver  in  loyalty  to  their  King. 


*  Bain.,  iii,  133 
t  Ibid. ,  134. 

X  Ibid*>  *37- 


1322  a.d.]  Invasion  and  Counter- Invasion.  279 


Desultory  negotiations  for  a  durable  peace  were 
carried  on  through  the  summer  of  1321,  the  last 
formal  attempt  being  the  mission  of  John  of  Brit¬ 
tany,  Earl  of  Richmond,  to  treat  with  the  Scots  at 
Newcastle-on-Tyne.  But  Edward’s  terms  were  in¬ 
consistent  with  the  absolute  independence  of  Scot¬ 
land,  and  proceedings,  often  renewed,  were  as  often 
broken  off.  Christmastide  drew  near,  when  the  truce 
would  come  to  an  end,  and  a  permanent  settlement 
was  as  far  off  as  ever,  when  the  rebellion  of  the  Earl 
of  Lancaster  plunged  England  into  civil  war  and 
withdrew  the  unhappy  Edward’s  attention  from 
Scottish  affairs.  A  secret  treaty  between  Douglas 
and  Lancaster  had  been  drafted,  of  which  the  terms 
were  fully  set  forth  in  a  paper  afterwards  found  on 
the  person  of  the  Earl  of  Hereford,  who  was  slain 
at  the  battle  of  Boroughbridge,  March  15,  1322. 
This  treaty  bound  the  King  of  Scots,  Moray,  and 
Douglas  to  assist  Lancaster,  who  is  referred  to  in 
the  document  as  King  Arthur,  at  all  times  in  Eng¬ 
land,  Wales,  or  Scotland,  without  claiming  any  share 
in  his  conquests.  Lancaster,  on  his  part,  engaged 
never  to  fight  against  the  Scots,  and  to  do  all  in  his 
power  to  secure  a  durable  peace  on  the  basis  of 
Scottish  independence,  so  soon  as  his  own  work 
should  be  accomplished.* 

The  agreement  never  was  ratified.  Lancaster 
wrote  to  Douglas,  requesting  him  to  fix  a  meeting 
at  which  “  we  may  adjust  all  the  points  of  our 
alliance,  and  agree  to  live  and  die  together.”  The 
letter,  which  Douglas  ought  to  have  received  on 


*  Fcedera,  ii. ,  479, 


28o 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1319  A.D.- 


February  7th,  did  not  come  into  his  hands  till  the 
17th.  Those  ten  days  probably  decided  the  fate  of 
the  English  monarchy.  Had  Moray  and  Douglas 
united  their  forces  with  those  of  Lancaster,  and, 
which  was  still  more  needful,  brought  their  trenchant 
judgment  and  great  military  experience  to  the  aid 
of  that  vacillating  prince,  the  disaster  which  over¬ 
took  him  at  Boroughbridge,  where  he  was  totally  de¬ 
feated  by  Sir  Andrew  de  Harcla,  might  have  been 
exchanged  for  victory,  and  the  fate  of  Edward  II. 
accelerated  by  a  couple  of  years.  As  it  happened, 
the  operations  of  the  Scots  leaders  were  conducted 
without  concert  with  English  allies.  It  was  a  bitter, 
hard  winter,  “  distressing  men  and  killing  nearly  all 
animals.”*  No  sooner  had  the  truce  expired  at 
Christmas,  than  the  weary,  wasteful  work  of  slaughter 
began  again.  Moray,  Douglas,  and  Walter  the 
Steward — a  well-tried  trio  of  comrades-in-arms — en¬ 
tered  the  bishopric  of  Durham  early  in  January. 
Moray  took  up  his  quarters  at  Dermington,  but  the 
other  two  pressed  on  to  Yorkshire,  wringing  a  heavy 
subsidy  from  the  district  of  Richmond  as  the  price 
of  exemption  from  harsh  treatment. 

The  execution  of  Lancaster  on  March  22d,  and 
the  complete  collapse  of  the  rebellion,  left  King 
Edward  once  more  free  to  turn  his  attention  to  the 
Scottish  war.  “  Give  yourself  no  further  solicitude,” 
he  wrote  to  the  Pope,  “  about  a  tiuce  with  the  Scots  ; 
the  exigencies  of  my  affairs  inclined  me  formerly  to 
listen  to  such  proposals,  but  now  I  am  resolved  to 
establish  peace  by  force  of  arms.”f  But  before  he 


*  Fordun,  cxxxvi. 


f  Hailes,  ii. ,  126. 


1322  A. D.]  Invasion  and  Counter- Invasion.  281 


could  take  the  field,  the  Scots  were  again  in  force  on 
the  English  side  of  the  Border,  having  crossed  the 
West  March  in  two  bodies,  one  under  King  Robert 
himself,*  the  other  under  under  Douglas  and  Moray. 
They  penetrated  eighty  miles  into  England,  passing 
south  of  Preston  ;  and  on  their  return  they  invested 
Carlisle  for  five  days. 

Harcla,  the  governor,  who  had  been  created  Earl 
of  Carlisle  for  his  defeat  and  capture  of  the  Earl 
of  Lancaster,  was  too  cautious  to  venture  from  be¬ 
hind  his  defences  ;  and  the  Scots  were  allowed  to 
return  to  their  own  country  with  much  booty  on 
July  24th,  the  day  before  that  appointed  for  the 
muster  of  the  English  army  at  Newcastle. 

It  behoved  the  King  of  Scots  now  to  look  to  the 
safety  of  his  own  dominions.  It  was  not  his  policy 
to  risk  another  trial  of  strength  with  England  ;  faith¬ 
ful  to  his  favourite  tactics  he  moved  northward, 
causing  every  head  of  cattle,  every  sack  of  corn, 
every  bale  of  goods,  to  be  driven  and  carried  out  of 
Edward’s  line  of  march.  It  is  in  masterly,  though 
unobtrusive,  details  like  this  that  the  genius  of  a 
great  strategist  may  be  recognised,  as  surely  as  in 
brilliant  manoeuvres  and  dashing  victories.  Having 
made  these  preparations,  King  Robert  retired  be¬ 
yond  the  Forth,  stationed  himself  at  Culross  and 
awaited  developments. 

The  English  began  their  march  in  the  first  days  of 
August,  1322.  On  the  5th  of  that  month  they  were 
at  Gosford  in  East  Lothian. f  So  faithfully  had 
King  Robert’s  instructions  been  carried  out,  that  all 

f  Bain,  iii. ,  142. 


*  Lanercost,  246. 


282 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1319  A.D.- 


that  the  English  foraging  parties  could  bring  in  was 
one  cow  from  Tranent,  too  lame  for  the  owner  to 
drive  away.  “  The  dearest  beef  I  ever  saw,”  dryly 
observed  the  Earl  of  WarenneA  An  unfavourable 
wind  kept  the  fleet  from  entering  the  Firth  with 
supplies  ;  the  troops  began  to  suffer  from  disease  and 
famine ;  total  starvation  was  not  far  off,  and,  after 
lying  three  days  in  Edinburgh  and  Leith,  Edward 
was  forced  to  order  a  retreat.  Then  was  the  mo¬ 
ment  for  Bruce  to  strike  in.  Douglas  was  sent  to 
hang  on  the  rear  guard  of  the  dispirited  host,  and 
defeated  the  English  light  horse  in  a  brisk  encounter 
near  Melrose.  But  he  was  not  strong  enough  to 
prevent  the  invaders  doing  a  vast  amount  of  mis¬ 
chief.  Holyrood  and  Melrose  Abbeys  were  sacked  ; 
the  prior  of  Melrose  with  another  monk  and  two 
lay  brethren  were  slain  in  defending  their  property, 
and  the  beautiful  monastery  of  Dryburgh  was  burnt 
to  the  ground.  All  this  was  fair  reprisal,  no  doubt, 
for  similar  senseless  outrages  committed  by  the 
Scots  in  their  raids  during  the  spring  and  summer. 

Widespread  as  the  desolation  had  been  on  both 
sides  of  the  Border  during  these  months,  the  year 
was  not  to  close  without  further  mischief.  King 
Robert  crossed  the  Solway  with  a  large  force  on 
October  1st,  and,  after  wasting  the  valley  of  the 

*  The  Brus ,  cxxxiv.,  73.  “A  sarcastical  and  ill-timed  reflection,” 
observes  Hailes,  with  less  than  his  usual  urbanity.  There  is  Ed¬ 
ward’s  own  authority  confirming  the  accounts  given  by  Barbour  and 
Fordun  of  the  extreme  scarcity.  On  September  17th  he  wrote  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  begging  him  to  send  money  in  haste,  for 
“  he  had  found  neither  man  nor  beast  in  the  Lothians,  and  intended 
to  winter  on  the  Border  for  its  safety  ”  (Bain,  iii.,  144.) 


1322  A.D.]  Invasion  and  Counter- Invasion.  283 


Eden,  turned  eastward  into  Durham.  Another 
party  of  Scots  besieged  Bamborough  Castle  in  North¬ 
umberland.  Sir  Roger  de  Horsley,  the  former  gov¬ 
ernor  of  Berwick,  bought  off  the  besiegers,  for 
which  he  was  severely  reprimanded  by  King  Ed¬ 
ward.  This  was,  said  the  King,  to  Sir  Roger’s 
“  dishonour  and  shame,  seeing  that  he  had  the 
stronger  force,”  '*  a  condition  of  success  which  King 
Edward  himself  had  found,  on  more  occasions  than 
one,  to  be  not  altogether  infallible. 

Norham  Castle  was  also  beset  at  this  time,  not,  as 
Lord  Hailes  says,  with  “  a  numerous  army,”  but,  as 
the  governor,  Sir  Thomas  Gray,  wrote  to  King  Ed¬ 
ward,  by  100  men-at-arms  and  100  hobelars.  f 

But  King  Robert  abandoned  all  attempts  for  these 
minor  prizes  in  favour  of  a  far  richer  one  that  seemed 
almost  within  his  grasp.  King  Edward  lay  at  Biland 
Abbey  in  Yorkshire,  and  thither  the  Bruce,  concen¬ 
trating  all  available  force,  marched  at  high  speed. 
On  October  14th  he  found  the  English,  under  the 
Earl  of  Richmond,  strongly  posted  on  a  ridge  be¬ 
tween  Biland  and  Rievaulx,  commanding  a  narrow 
pass  which  led  to  King  Edward’s  quarters.  A  coun¬ 
cil  of  war  was  held  by  the  Scottish  leaders.  Douglas 
undertook  to  carry  the  entrance  to  the  pass,  which 
was  held  by  Sir  Thomas  Uchtred  and  Sir  Ralph  de 
Cobham,  and  the  King  consented  to  his  attacking  at 
once.  The  Earl  of  Moray,  ever  a  friendly  rival  of 
the  Douglas  in  feats  of  chivalry,  and  jealous  of  the 
distinction  thus  afforded  to  him,  left  his  own  division 


*  Bain,  iii.,  145. 
f  Ibid. 


284 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1319  A.D«- 


and  joined  Douglas  as  a  volunteer.  De  Cobham  was 
reputed  the  best  knight  of  his  day  in  England,  and 
his  position  was  almost  impregnable  from  attack  in 
front.  Great  stones  were  rolled  down  the  slopes, 
making  havoc  in  the  Scottish  ranks,  and  the  English 
archers  kept  up  a  hot  fire.  It  seemed  to  King  Rob¬ 
ert  that  Douglas  had  undertaken  something  beyond 
his  strength  ;  so  he  sent  forward  the  Highlanders 
and  Islesmen  to  his  support.  These  active  fellows 
scaled  the  crags  on  either  side  of  the  pass,  meaning 
to  take  de  Cobham  on  the  flanks.  But  on  arriving 
at  the  top,  they  found  themselves  face  to  face  with 
the  main  body  under  Richmond.  Without  a  mo¬ 
ment’s  hesitation  the  Highlanders  formed  for  the 
attack,  and  charged  the  English  so  impetuously  that 
these  broke  and  fled.  It  was  a  wonderful  perform¬ 
ance,  and  one  not  easily  to  be  understood  by  those 
who  know  of  what  stuff  English  soldiers  are  made. 
Sir  Thomas  Gray  describes  his  countrymen  as  be¬ 
having  before  the  Scots  like  hares  before  grey¬ 
hounds.* 

Richmond  was  taken  prisoner,  and  with  him 
Henri  de  Sully,  Grand  Butler  of  France,  and  other 
French  knights  of  renown.  King  Edward  escaped 
to  York,  but  all  his  baggage  fell  into  the  hands  of 
the  victors.  Walter  the  Steward  pursued  him  as  far 
as  the  gates  of  York,  and  waited  there  till  the  even¬ 
ing,  to  see  if  any  would  come  out  and  do  battle  with 
him  ;  but  he  waited  in  vain  ;  none  would  take  up 
his  challenge. 

When  Richmond  was  brought  before  him,  the 


*  Com  du  leuer  deuant  leuereres. — Scalacronica,  150. 


1322  a.d.]  Invasion  and  Counter- Invasion.  285 


King  of  Scots  departed  from  his  habitual  courtesy 
towards  his  prisoners.  The  Earl,  it  seems,  had  in¬ 
curred  Robert’s  special  displeasure  by  making  in¬ 
sulting  remarks  on  some  former  occasion. 

“Wert  thou  not  such  a  caitiff,”  said  the  King, 
“  thou  shouldest  pay  dearly  for  what  thou  hast  said.” 

The  French  knights,  on  the  other  hand,  were  most 
graciously  received.  The  King  told  them  that  he 
perfectly  understood  their  position  ;  he  did  not  in¬ 
terpret  it  as  inconsistent  with  the  friendship  between 
Scotland  and  France  that  they  should  be  in  arms 
against  him,  because,  finding  themselves  in  England 
when  fighting  was  going  on,  it  was  clear  that  their 
chivalry  would  not  suffer  them  to  keep  aloof.  Three 
of  them,  Robert  and  William  Bertram  and  Elias 
Anilage,  had  surrendered  with  their  squires  to  Doug¬ 
las,  who  therefore  was  entitled  to  the  ransom,  esti¬ 
mated  at  4400  marks.  But  King  Robert,  anxious, 
no  doubt  from  motives  of  policy,  to  gratify  a  power¬ 
ful  ally,  announced  that  he  would  send  the  French 
knights,  free  of  ransom,  in  a  present  to  his  royal 
brother  of  France.* 


*  This  was  not  vicarious  generosity  on  the  part  of  Robert.  By  a 
subsequent  grant  of  lands  he  made  good  to  Douglas  what  he  had  lost 
in  the  ransom  of  the  Frenchmen.  The  deed  conveying  these  lands 
is  known  in  the  Douglas  archives  as  the  Emerald  Charter.  After 
setting  forth  that  the  grant  was  made  in  partial  redemption  of  the 
King’s  debt  to  Douglas  for  the  liberation  of  his  prisoners,  it  con¬ 
tinues — “  and  in  order  that  this  charter  may  have  perpetual  effect, 
we,  in  our  own  person  and  with  our  own  hand,  have  placed  on  the 
hand  of  the  said  James  de  Douglas  a  ring,  with  a  stone  called  an 
emeraude,  in  token  of  sasine  and  perpetual  endurance  to  the  said 
James  and  his  heirs  for  ever”  {The  Douglas  Book ,  i . ,  155  ;  iii.,  11). 


286 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1319-22  A.D 


The  King  of  Scots  prudently  refrained  from  mak¬ 
ing  any  attempt  on  the  strong  city  of  York,  but 
contented  himself  by  harrying  all  the  surrounding 
country,  carrying  his  arms  as  far  as  Beverley  in  the 
East  Riding,  from  which  town  he  exacted  a  heavy 
indemnity.  The  archiepiscopal  registers  bear  their 
testimony  to  the  great  losses  sustained  by  the  relig¬ 
ious  houses,  and  to  the  consequent  dispersion  of 
several  convents  of  nuns.  Finally,  about  Christmas- 
tide,  the  Scots  withdrew  from  the  third  invasion  of 
of  England  undertaken  during  the  year  1322. 


Sir  John  of  Brittany,  Sir  Hugh  le  Despenser. 

Earl  of  Richmond. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

NEGOTIATIONS  FOR  PEACE. 

A.D.  1322-1326. 

THERE  falls  to  be  recorded  at  this  point  the 
mournful  story  of  the  disgrace  and  death  of 
one  of  the  bravest  and  most  experienced 
knights  in  the  English  service. 

King  Edward’s  incapacity  alike  as  a  civil  ruler  and  a 
soldier,  his  tarnished  private  fame,  and,  perhaps  most 
of  all,  his  besotted  partiality  for  the  detested  le  De- 
spensers,  had  bred  deep  disgust  among  his  ablest  com¬ 
manders.  Among  these  was  Sir  Andrew  de  Harcla, 
whom  the  King  had  made  Earl  of  Carlisle  in  1322, 
appointing  him  at  the  same  time  Warden  of  the  West 
Marches.  Early  in  1323  it  came  to  the  knowledge  of 
King  Edward  that  de  Harcla  (for  he  enjoyed  his  new 
dignity  for  such  a  short  time  that  it  may  be  per¬ 
mitted  to  continue  to  call  him  by  the  name  under 
which  he  won  his  renown)  was  engaged  in  treason¬ 
able  correspondence  with  the  King  of  Scots.  De 
Harcla  met  King  Robert  at  Lochmaben  on  January 
3d,  where,  during  a  private  interview,  an  agreement 

287 


288 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1322  A.D.- 


of  a  most  compromising  character  was  drafted. 
Within  a  week,  by  some  means  unknown,  this 
document  was  brought  into  King  Edward’s  hands.* 
It  contained  the  heads  of  a  secret  treaty,  under 
which  it  was  provided — i,  that  each  realm  was  to 
have  its  own  national  king  ;  2,  that  de  Harcla  should 
aid  King  Robert  in  maintaining  Scotland  against  all 
gainsayers;  3,  that  King  Robert  and  de  Harcla 
should  maintain  the  realm  of  England  at  the  judg¬ 
ment  of  twelve  persons,  of  whom  six  were  to  be  ap¬ 
pointed  by  each  party  to  the  treaty.  If  the  King  of 
England  should  assent  to  these  conditions  within  a 
year,  the  King  of  Scots  bound  himself  to  found  an 
abbey  in  Scotland  for  the  souls  of  those  slain  in 
war,  and  within  ten  years  would  pay  an  indemnity 
of  40,000  marks.  It  was  also  stipulated  that  the 
King  of  England  should  have  the  disposal  in  mar¬ 
riage  of  the  heir-male  of  the  King  of  Scots,  under 
the  advice  of  the  aforesaid  twelve. 

Immediately  on  becoming  possessed  of  this  damning 
document,  King  Edward  issued  orders  that  no  truce 
should  be  made  with  the  Scots  without  his  know¬ 
ledge.  De  Harcla,  it  appears,  had  claimed  the  royal 
authority  for  negotiating  a  truce,  for  William  de 
Ayremynne  was  instructed  to  search  the  Chancery 
Rolls  to  see  if  any  such  authority  existed. f 

*  Hailes  refers  to  the  terms  of  this  treaty,  as  he  read  them  in 
Tyrrel’s  version  of  Lanercost ,  as  being  of  “  exceeding  incredibility.” 
But,  except  that  King  Robert’s  payment  was  named  at  80,000  marks 
instead  of  40,000,  the  statement  in  Lanercost  accords  perfectly  with 
a  transcript  of  the  original  indenture,  preserved  in  the  Privy 
Council  Records  (Bain,  iii.,  148). 

f  Ibid. ,  148. 


1326  A.D.] 


Negotiations, 


289 


Meanwhile,  de  Harcla  made  no  secret  of  what  he 
had  done.  The  news  went  forth  from  Carlisle  that 
at  length  this  wretched  warfare  was  to  have  an  end, 
whereat  theie  was  great  rejoicing  among  the  farmers 
and  shepherds  of  the  Border  lands  *  But  there  were 
plenty  of  persons  in  the  confidence  of  King  Edward, 
ready  to  put  de  Harcla’s  action  in  the  worst  light, 
for  they  were  jealous  of  the  knight’s  rapid  promo¬ 
tion.  Instant  measures  were  taken  for  his  punish¬ 
ment.  Sir  Anthony  de  Lucy  was  ordered  to  arrest 
him  at  Carlisle,  but  this  had  to  be  accomplished  by 
stratagem.  Coming  to  the  citadel  on  February  25th, 
and  choosing  an  hour  when  the  garrison  was  dispersed 
on  various  duties,  de  Lucy  entered  the  hall  where  de 
Harcla  was  sitting  dictating  his  correspondence. 
De  Lucy  was  at  this  time  the  King’s  sheriff  of  Car¬ 
lisle,  as  well  as  de  Harcla’s  intimate  friend,  so  there 
was  no  difficulty  in  obtaining  access  to  the  culprit. 
But  the  sheriff  was  accompanied  by  Sir  Hugh  de 
Lowther,  Sir  Richard  de  Denton,  Sir  Hugh  de  Mo- 
riceby,  and  four  men-at-arms,  besides  an  armed  party 
which  he  left  outside.  This  aroused  the  suspicions 
of  the  household,  one  of  whom  raised  the  cry  of 
“Treason!”  On  this  the  porter  tried  to  shut  the 
inner  gate,  but  was  immediately  cut  down  by  Sir 
Richard  de  Denton,  and  de  Harcla  was  made  the 
King’s  prisoner. 

His  trial  followed  on  March  3d  ;  he  was  found 
guilty  of  high  treason,  and  sentenced  to  be  degraded 
from  the  rank  of  earl  by  being  stripped  of  his  belt  ; 
from  knighthood,  by  having  his  gilt  spurs  hacked 

*  Lanercost,  249. 

1 9 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1322  A.D.- 


29O 

off;  from  citizenship,  by  forfeiture  of  all  his  posses¬ 
sions  ;  then  to  be  drawn  to  the  gallows  at  Henriby 
and  hanged,  his  head  to  be  cut  off  and  sent  to  Lon¬ 
don  for  exposure  on  the  tower,  his  entrails  to  be 
taken  out  and  burnt,  and  his  four  quarters  to  be 
fixed  up  at  Carlisle,  Newcastle,  Bristol,  and  Dover. 
All  of  which  was  carried  out  the  same  day  of  the  trial, 
probably  under  the  eyes  of  the  friar  who  so  sympa¬ 
thetically  describes  the  scene.*  Under  the  gallows, 
in  a  clear  and  spirited  address  to  the  people,  he 
explained  the  considerations  which  had  induced  him 
to  enter  into  negotiations  with  the  Scots. 

Although  it  may  not  be  possible  to  clear  the 
memory  of  this  brave  and  skilful  soldier  from  all 
the  guilt  for  which  he  suffered,  yet  the  clearer  light 
which  has  fallen  on  the  affair  since  it  was  examined 
by  Lord  Hailes,  would  probably  have  led  that  writer 
to  a  more  lenient  judgment  than  he  passed  on  de 
Harcla.  Founding  on  Tyrrel’s  imperfect  translation 
of  the  Lanercost  chronicle,  Hailes  denounced  him 
as  the  betrayer  of  his  King  and  benefactor.  But  de 
Harcla  had  proved  his  loyalty  by  many  years  of 
splendid  service,  far  more  effectively  than  many  who 
continued  to  stand  high  in  King  Edward’s  favour. 
At  last,  however,  he  seems  to  have  lost  all  hope  for 
his  country  under  such  rulers  as  controlled  her 
course.  As  the  chronicler  of  Lanercost  mournfully 
observes — 

“  Perceiving  that  the  King  of  England  neither  knew  how  to  rule 
his  kingdom  nor  was  able  to  defend  it  against  the  Scots,  who  were 
each  year  doing  more  and  more  damage  to  it,  and  fearing  lest  in  the 


*  Lanercost ,  250. 


1326  A.D.l 


Negotiations . 


291 


end  the  whole  kingdom  should  come  to  be  lost,  he  chose  the  least  of 
two  evils  and  decided  that  it  would  be  better  for  the  commonalty  of 
both  kingdoms  that  each  king  should  possess  his  own  without  homage 
of  any  sort,  than  that  such  slaughter,  conflagration,  imprisonments, 
devastation,  and  depredation  should  go  on  every  year.  ” 

It  was  all  very  well  for  well  armed  and  well  mounted 
knights  to  ride  forth  in  search  of  chivalrous  adven¬ 
ture,  and  then  return  to  their  comfortable  homes  in 
the  south,  till  the  time  came  for  fresh  exploits.  But 
de  Harcla,  during  many  years  in  his  Border  eyrie, 
had  witnessed  the  heartrending  misery  brought 
upon  poorer  folk,  and  he  was  sick  of  it  all.  He 
knew  that  King  Robert  was  of  the  same  mind,  and 
in  going  to  him  he  took  the  only  course  illumined 
by  a  single  ray  of  hope.  But  of  course  the  fact 
remains  that  de  Harcla  did  in  the  end  betray  the 
trust  he  had  discharged  so  honourably  and  for  so 
many  years,  and  civil  government  would  become 
impossible  if  high  officials  were  left  at  liberty  to 
shape  the  national  policy  according  to  their  private 
judgment. 

King  Edward  now  found  himself  once  more  under 
the  necessity  of  suing  for  truce.  As  a  preliminary 
to  negotiations  and  to  obliterate  inconvenient  asso¬ 
ciations,  on  March  nth  he  ordered  that  the  bodies  of 
all  traitors,  then  hanging  on  the  gallows  in  various 
places,  should  be  taken  down  and  buried  out  of 
sight.  His  proposals  were  submitted  to  the  King  of 
Scots  at  Berwick  on  March  20th,  by  the  hands  of  Sir 
Henri  de  Sully,  the  French  knight  taken  at  Biland, 
who  was  empowered  to  negotiate  the  terms.  King 
Robert’s  reasons  for  refusing  to  entertain  them  were 


292 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1322  A.D.- 


embodied  in  a  dignified  letter  addressed  to  Sir  Henri 
on  the  following  day. 

“  I  see,”  runs  the  letter,  “  from  the  copy  of  the  letters  of  the  King 
of  England  which  you  have  transmitted  to  me,  that  he  says  he  has 
granted  a  cessation  of  arms  to  the  men  of  Scotland  who  are  engaged 
in  war  against  him.  This  language  is  very  strange.  In  our  former 
truces,  I  was  always  named  as  the  principal  party,  although  he  did 
not  vouchsafe  to  give  me  the  title  of  King  ;  but  now  he  makes  no 
more  mention  of  me  than  of  the  least  person  in  Scotland  ;  so  that,  if 
the  treaty  were  to  be  violated  by  him,  I  should  have  no  better  title 
to  demand  redress  than  the  meanest  of  my  subjects. 

“  I  cannot  consent  to  a  truce  granted  in  such  terms  ;  but  I  am 
willing  to  consent,  if  the  wonted  form  is  employed.  I  send  you  a 
copy  of  the  King’s  letter  ;  for  I  imagine  that  you  either  have  not 
perused  it,  or  not  adverted  to  its  tenour.” 

Edward  had  to  conform  to  King  Robert’s  wishes, 
though  it  was  such  a  bitter  humiliation  to  Henry  de 
Beaumont  that,  rather  than  consent  to  a  truce  on 
such  terms,  he  resigned  his  seat  on  the  council. 
Finally,  on  May  30,  1323,  a  truce  with  Scotland  for 
thirteen  years  was  proclaimed  in  the  English  coun¬ 
tries  by  order  of  King  Edward  at  York,  and  ratified 
by  King  Robert  at  Berwick  on  June  7th. 

Notwithstanding  the  truce,  Edward  continued  to 
press  the  Pope  to  enforce  the  sentence  of  excom¬ 
munication  against  King  Robert  and  his  subjects. 
It  is  not  easy  to  see  what  more  there  remained  for 
the  Pope  to  do,  seeing  that  the  sentence  had  been 
in  full  force  for  some  months  already.  Anyhow, 
his  Holiness  was  far  too  well  pleased  by  the  conclu¬ 
sion  of  the  terms  of  truce,  to  be  willing  to  do  any¬ 
thing  which  might  disturb  them.  By  a  singular 
clause  in  the  treaty,  power  had  been  taken  for 


1326  A.D.] 


Negotiations. 


293 


Robert  and  his  people  to  procure  absolution  from 
the  Court  of  Rome.  Of  this  clause  the  Pope  now 
reminded  Edward,  explaining  that  as  he — King 
Edward — had  consented  to  the  Scots  obtaining 
absolution  if  they  could,  it  would  be  most  improper 
to  renew  and  publish  the  excommunication.  Fur¬ 
ther,  whereas  Edward  had  besought  the  Pope  not 
to  sanction  the  election  of  any  Scotsmen  to  bishop¬ 
rics  in  their  own  country,  the  Holy  Father  thought 
that  would  be  to  deprive  the  flock  of  shepherds 
altogether,  inasmuch  as,  during  the  truce,  no  Eng¬ 
lish  subject  might  pass  to  or  abide  in  Scotland,  nor 
any  Scot  in  England. 

The  King  of  Scots  desired  greatly  to  regain  the 
Pope’s  favour,  with  which,  indeed,  no  reigning 
monarch  could  afford  to  dispense  for  long.  So  the 
Earl  of  Moray  went  on  a  mission  to  Avignon  to 
sound  his  Holiness  as  to  his  willingness  to  receive 
Scottish  ambassadors.  He  met  with  much  more 
favour  than  was  agreeable  to  Edward,  and  the  Pope, 
in  excusing  himself  to  the  English  King,  has  left  a 
pretty  full  account  of  what  took  place  at  the  inter¬ 
view,  at  which  de  Sully  was  present  also. 

Moray  explained  that  he  was  under  a  vow  to  visit 
the  Holy  Land  and  that  he  had  sought  the  audience 
to  obtain  the  necessary  indulgences.  The  Pope 
delicately  reminded  him  that,  lying  as  he  did  under 
sentence  of  excommunication,  he  could  not  expect 
to  do  his  soul  any  good  by  such  a  journey,  and, 
being  without  an  effective  military  force,  he  could 
not  perform  any  useful  service  in  Palestine  for  the 
Church.  So  he  refused  Moray’s  request,  adding 


294 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1322  A.D.- 


that  he  would  consider  it  favourably  hereafter,  pro¬ 
vided  the  Earl  exerted  himself  to  establish  a  lasting 
peace. 

To  Moray’s  next  request,  for  a  passport  in  favour 
of  the  ambassadors  who  were  coming  to  negotiate 
for  reconciliation  with  the  Church,  the  Pope  on 
technical  grounds  declined  to  comply,  though  he 
consented  to  direct  all  the  Princes,  through  whose 
dominions  the  ambassadors  might  pass,  to  grant 
them  safe-conduct.  Next  Moray  handed  his  Holi¬ 
ness  King  Robert’s  offer  to  join  the  French  King 
in  his  intended  crusade,  or,  if  that  should  fall 
through,  his  undertaking  to  go  to  the  Holy  Land 
himself  or  send  his  nephew,  the  bearer  of  the  said 
offer,  instead.  The  Pope  replied  that  King  Robert 
could  not  be  received  as  a  crusader  until  he  had 
made  peace  with  England  and  become  reconciled 
to  the  Church.  Upon  which  Moray  respectfully 
represented  that  these  objects  were  precisely  those 
for  which  he  and  his  royal  uncle  were  most  sincerely 
impatient,  but  that  to  secure  them,  it  was  indispen¬ 
sable  that  his  Holiness  should  recognise  the  posi¬ 
tion  of  Robert  de  Brus  by  addressing  him  as  King 
of  Scotland.  He  assured  him  that  any  bull  he 
might  issue  containing  that  title  would  be  reverently 
obeyed,  but  otherwise  it  would  be  returned  un¬ 
opened,  as  the  former  one  was. 

The  Pope  found  much  difficulty  in  explaining 
away  to  Edward  the  significance  of  his  consent  to 
this  proposal. 

“  We  remember  to  have  told  you,”  he  wrote,  “  that  our  bestowing 
the  title  of  King  on  Robert  de  Brus  would  neither  strengthen  his 


1326  A.D.] 


Negotiations . 


295 


claim  nor  impair  yours.  Our  earnest  desires  are  for  reconciliation 
and  peace,  and  you  well  know  that  our  bull,  issued  for  attaining 
these  objects,  will  never  be  received  in  Scotland,  if  we  address  it  to 
Robert  de  Brus  under  any  other  appellation  but  that  of  King.  We 
therefore  exhort  your  royal  wisdom  that  you  will  prudently  tolerate 
that  we  write  to  the  said  Robert  under  the  royal  title.  We  hear  that 
reproaches  have  reached  you,  as  if  the  Earl  of  Moray  had  made 
other  proposals,  prejudicial  to  you  and  your  kingdom.  You  may  assure 
yourself  that  we  would  not  have  permitted  any  proposals  of  that  nat¬ 
ure  to  have  been  so  much  as  mentioned  in  the  absence  of  those  to 
whom  you  have  committed  the  superintendance  of  your  affairs.  Be¬ 
sides,  Henry  de  Sully,  a  person  of  known  zeal  for  your  honour  and 
interest,  was  present  at  the  audience  we  gave  to  the  Earl  of  Moray. 
He  heard  all  that  passed,  and  he  would  not  have  suffered  us,  even 
had  we  been  so  inclined,  to  receive  any  proposals  prejudicial  to  you 
or  your  kingdom.” 

Notwithstanding  all  the  attempts  of  the  Pope  to 
minimise  this  concession  to  the  excommunicated 
King  of  Scots,  it  remained  of  enormous  importance. 
In  fact  Moray,  who  had  borne  a  large  share  of  the 
dangers  and  hardships  by  which  the  English  had 
been  overcome  in  warfare,  had  now  achieved  a  sig¬ 
nal  success  in  the  more  delicate  province  of  di¬ 
plomacy.  King  Edward  was  not  slow  to  perceive 
this.  He  replied  to  the  Pope  that,  in  addressing  de 
Brus  as  King  of  Scotland,  he  had  done  a  thing  dis¬ 
honourable  to  the  Church  and  highly  prejudicial  to 
the  claims  of  the  English  crown,  for,  said  he,  the 
Scottish  nation  will  naturally  believe  that  the  Pope 
meant  to  acknowledge  the  right  where  he  had  be¬ 
stowed  the  title.  He  begged  him  in  language  almost 
less  than  conciliatory,  to  refrain  from  mentioning 
the  objectionable  title  in  future  correspondence. 

An  event  of  the  greatest  moment  to  the  kingdom 


296 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1322  A,D,~ 


and  people  of  Scotland  took  place  on  March  5,  1324. 
Queen  Elizabeth  of  Scotland,  after  twenty  years  of 
marriage,  bore  a  son  at  Dunfermline,  who  was  chris¬ 
tened  David.  It  would  be  impossible  to  exaggerate 
the  importance  to  the  nation  of  this  happy  occa¬ 
sion,  reviving,  as  it  did,  hopes  that  had  well-nigh 
failed  that  King  Robert  might  transmit  to  one  of 
his  own  line  the  kingdom  he  had  won  with  such 
dauntless  resolution,  and  that  so  the  people  might  be 
spared  the  dreaded  trials  of  a  disputed  succession.* 
Negotiations  went  on  at  York  during  the  greater 
part  of  1324,  for  the  conversion  of  the  truce  into  a 
durable  peace,  and  for  the  ransom  of  English  prison¬ 
ers.  Scottish  interests  were  committed  to  the  hands 
of  the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews  and  the  Earl  of  Moray, 
with  six  other  envoys.f  On  the  English  side  were 


*  The  birth  of  this  Prince  was  the  occasion  of  a  good  deal  of 
ribaldry  by  satirical  English  poets.  The  following  infamous  dog¬ 
gerel,  which  certainly  will  not  bear  translation,  may  serve  to  illustrate 
the  devices  by  which  educated  persons  strove  to  inflame  popular 
opinion  in  England  against  the  Scots.  It  refers  to  an  alleged  inci¬ 
dent  at  the  Christening  of  Prince  David. 

Dum  puerum  David  praesul  baptismate  lavit, 

Ventrum  laxavit,  baptisterium  maculavit. 

Fontem  foedavit  in  quo  mingendo  cacavit ; 

Sancta  prophanavit,  olei  foeces  reseravit. 

Brus  nimis  emunxit,  cum  stercore  sacra  perunxit, 

Se  male  disjunxit,  urinae  stercora  junxit  ; 

Dum  baptizatur  altare  Dei  maculatur, 

Nam  super  altare  fertur  mingendo  cacare. 

•••••.. 

Sic  domus  alma  Dei  foedo  repletus  odore.” 

— Political  Poems  and  Songs ,  Record  Series,  vol.  i.,  ps  40, 
f  Bain,  iii.,  156. 


1326  A.D.3 


Negotiations . 


29  7 


the  le  Despensers,  father  and  son,  with  ten  col¬ 
leagues.  But  no  progress  was  made  towards  a 
settlement,  owing  to  the  obstinacy  with  which  the 
English  clung  to  their  old  claim  of  suzerainty,  and 
the  refusal  of  the  Scots  to  entertain  it.  Equally 
impracticable  was  the  English  demand  for  the  sur¬ 
render  of  Berwick,  on  the  ground  that  the  Scots  had 
seized  it  illegally,  in  violation  of  the  papal  truce. 
At  King  Edward’s  instance,  the  Pope  withheld  ab¬ 
solution  from  Robert  and  his  subjects,  until  these 
points  should  be  conceded  ;  but  this  did  not  affect 
the  resolution  of  the  Scots  in  the  smallest  degree, 
for  they  had  long  since  learnt  to  discount  the  terrors 
of  excommunication. 

But  of  all  the  acts  of  Edward  II.  pending  these 
negotiations,  the  most  ambiguous  was  his  command 
to  Edward  de  Balliol,  son  of  the  late  King  of  Scots, 
to  return  to  England.  Living  as  de  Balliol  had 
done  for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  in  harm¬ 
less  obscurity  on  his  paternal  lands  in  Normandy, 
he  had  fallen  out  of  memory  with  the  existing  gen¬ 
eration  of  Scots.  No  explanation  is  forthcoming  of 
the  King  of  England’s  intentions  in  bringing  him 
over  the  sea  at  this  critical  time,  and  each  one  must 
be  left  to  put  his  own  interpretation  on  the  matter. 

In  spite  of  the  prohibition  against  the  natives  of 
either  kingdom  entering  the  territory  of  the  other 
during  the  truce,  trade  between  England  and  Scot¬ 
land  began  to  revive  by  slow  degrees.  Coal  con¬ 
tinued  to  be  sent  from  Newcastle  in  payment  for  the 
ransom  of  prisoners  in  Scotland.*  Ships  carried 

*  Bain,  iii. ,  150. 


298 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1322  A.D.- 


salmon,  deerskins,  and  lard  from  Scottish  ports,  and 
brought  back  corn  in  exchange  from  the  south  of 
England.*  But  the  evil  teaching  of  a  generation 
of  warfare  had  encouraged  the  growth  of  piracy  in 
British  waters.  Record  remains  of  a  gruesome  af¬ 
fair  which  took  place  off  Whitby,  wherein  a  Scottish 
merchant-vessel,  la  Pelarym  (pelerin),  was  seized,  all 
on  board  slain,  consisting  of  her  master,  nine  Scot¬ 
tish  merchants,  sixteen  Scottish  pilgrims,  and  thir¬ 
teen  women  passengers — thirty-nine  souls  in  all. 
The  cargo,  valued  at  £ 2000 ,  was  stolen,  and  the 
ship  set  adrift. f 

King  Robert  was  still  of  an  age  when  life  may  be 
enjoyed  by  men  of  good  health,  for  he  was  no  more 
than  fifty-one  ;  but  his  constitution  had  been  strained 
by  the  excessive  exertions  of  the  last  twenty  years, 
and  he  began  to  suffer  from  a  disease  which  the  his¬ 
torians  of  the  fourteenth  century  describe  as  leprosy, 
the  seeds  of  which  had  been  sown  amid  the  exposure 
and  privation  of  the  early  years  of  his  reign.  In 
spite,  however,  of  frequent  attacks  of  suffering,  he 
diligently  employed  the  comparative  leisure  attained 
by  the  prevailing  truce  in  conducting  the  internal 
affairs  of  his  kingdom.  In  March,  1325,  he  held  a 
Parliament  at  Scone,  where  special  attention  was 
given  to  the  needs  of  Melrose  Abbey,  which  had 
been  utterly  wrecked  by  the  English  in  their  retreat 
from  Edinburgh.  To  enable  them  to  rebuild  their 
monastery  and  church,  the  abbot  and  convent  re¬ 
ceived  a  grant  of  all  the  dues  leviable  by  the  judi¬ 
ciary^  Roxburgh,  to  the  extent  of  £2000  sterling. 

*  Bain,  iii.,  156.  f  Ibid.,  162. 


DUNBARTON  CASTLE. 

C From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros.,  Dundee .) 


1326  A.D.] 


Negotiations . 


299 


The  Exchequer  Rolls  of  Scotland,  which  were  in¬ 
terrupted  at  the  death  of  the  Maid  of  Norway  in 
1290,  recommence  in  this  year,  and  contain  evidence 
of  some  of  the  projects  in  which  the  King  took  most 
personal  interest.  It  has  been  already  noticed  that 
he  almost  invariably  demolished  those  castles  which 
fell  into  his  hands  during  the  war  ;  his  motive,  of 
course,  being  to  prevent  their  being  of  immediate 
use  to  the  enemy  in  the  event  of  their  recapture. 
Dunbarton  is  said  to  have  been  the  only  fortress  pre¬ 
served,  and  this  was  put  to  the  use  of  a  state  prison. 
Now,  however,  that  the  English,  as  was  hoped,  had 
been  finally  expelled  from  Scottish  soil,  and  the  lands 
owned  by  such  of  the  feudal  lords  as  remained  lieges 
of  England  had  been  divided  among  the  adherents 
of  the  Bruce,  the  time  had  come  to  put  the  national 
defences  in  repair.  But  inasmuch  as  the  terms  of 
the  truce  prohibited  the  erection  of  any  works  in  the 
Border  counties,  where  undoubtedly  there  was  most 
need  for  defence,  a  beginning  was  made  in  a  part  of 
the  kingdom  which,  at  first  sight,  might  have  seemed 
more  secure  than  the  rest. 

In  choosing  the  west  Highlands  as  the  site  of  a 
place  of  arms,  the  King  of  Scots  was  looking  more 
to  future  than  to  existing  conditions.  John  of  Lorn, 
kinsman  of  the  Comyns  and  Balliols  and  inveterate 
opponent  of  the  Bruce,  was  dead  ;  and  his  posses¬ 
sions,  with  those  of  Alexander  of  Islay  and  part  of 
the  wide  territory  of  the  Comyns  of  Badenoch,  had 
been  bestowed  on  Alexander’s  brother,  Angus  Oig 
or  Young  Angus,  who  became  Lord  of  the  Isles. 
But  faithful  as  Angus  had  ever  proved  to  the  Bruce, 


300 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1322  A.D„- 


he  was  powerless  to  bind  his  successors ;  and  King 
Robert  decided  on  building  a  castle  which,  in  after 
generations,  might  tend  to  keep  the  Lords  of  the 
Isles  to  their  good  behaviour.  He  chose  a  site  on 
the  east  shore  of  the  isthmus  of  Cantyre,  where  tra¬ 
dition  reported  that  Magnus  Barefoot  of  Norway  was 
drawn  from  sea  to  sea  in  a  galley,  when  the  western 
isles  were  ceded  to  him  in  1098.  The  ceremony  of 
sailing  round  each  island  had  been  held  essential  to 
complete  infeftment,  and,  in  sailing  thus  across  the 
isthmus  of  Tarbet,*  the  whole  of  Cantyre  was  for¬ 
mally  included  in  the  Norse  dominions.  It  is  said 
that  when  King  Robert  visited  the  western  isles  in 
1315,  he  conciliated  the  superstitious  Highlanders 
in  like  manner  by  allowing  himself  to  be  drawn 
across  the  Tarbet  in  a  boat. 

The  King  took  a  keen  interest  in  the  progress  of 
the  works  at  his  new  castle.  Robert  the  mason, 
besides  his  contract  price  of  ^282  i$s.  and  a  chalder 
of  oatmeal  and  barley,  received  ^5  6s.  Sd.  extra,  out 
of  the  royal  bounty,  because,  in  the  King’s  absence, 
he  had  built  the  walls  thicker  than  was  set  forth  in 
the  specifications.  The  wages  of  the  other  workmen 
may  be  seen  in  the  accounts  of  John  de  Lany,  con¬ 
stable  of  the  castle.  Besides  the  said  Robert,  there 
were  also  John  and  Hugh,  masons,  Neil  and  Patrick, 
smiths,  John  the  carpenter,  Donald  the  blocker,  and 
Neil  the  plumber.  When  Sir  James  Douglas  and 

*  There  are  many  places  in  Scotland  called  Tarbet  or  Tarbert, 
invariably  narrow  necks  of  land  between  two  seas.  The  name 
is  derived  from  the  Gaelic  tar  (root  of  tarriungim ,  I  draw)  and 
bad ,  a  boat. 


TARBET  CASTLE  ON  LOCH  FYNE. 

( From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros.,  Dundee . ) 


1326  A.D.] 


Negotiations. 


30 1 


the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews  came  to  inspect  the  works 
there  was  an  outlay  of  2 s.  2 d.  for  birchen  boughs  to 
strew  their  chambers  withal.* 

In  addition  to  building  operations  undertaken  for 
the  defence  of  his  kingdom,  King  Robert  busied  him¬ 
self  in  providing  a  country  house,  and  in  the  usual 
pursuits  of  a  country  gentleman,  such  as  yachting, 
hunting,  and  farming.  Instead  of  settling  at  his  pa¬ 
ternal  mansion  of  Turnberry,  he  chose  a  spot  in  the 
district  of  the  Lennox,  which  he  ever  held  in  affec¬ 
tion  because  of  its  association  with  his  early  adven¬ 
tures.  But  the  chief  cause  for  fixing  his  residence 
on  the  Clyde,  rather  than  in  his  native  Carrick,  was 
doubtless  the  easier  access  thence  to  Perth,  at  that 
time  virtually  the  capital  of  Scotland.  In  1326,  then, 
the  King  of  Scots  gave  his  lands  of  Old  Montrose  to 
Sir  David  Graham,  receiving  in  exchange  some 
ground  at  Cardross,  near  Dunbarton,  and  the  islands 
of  Inchcailleach  and  Inchfad  in  Loch  Lomond. 
By  a  further  exchange  of  half  the  lands  of  Leckie  in 
Stirlingshire,  he  obtained  from  his  ancient  ally,  Mal¬ 
colm,  Earl  of  Lennox,  two  additional  ploughgates  of 
land  at  Cardross. f  It  was  here,  in  this  quiet  recess 
on  the  riverside,  that  the  King  spent  such  leisure  as 
he  could  snatch  from  business  in  his  declining  years, 
amid  surroundings  very  different  from  the  scene  of 

*  Excheqxier  Rolls,  i. ,  52  et  passim. 

•f  Much  confusion  existed  in  the  ancient  land  measures.  Under 
the  Anglian  system  prevailing  in  Northumbria  and  the  Lothians,  a 
ploughgate  consisted  of  104  modern  acres  of  arable  land.  But  in 
the  west  the  Celtic  system  survived  for  an  indefinite  time,  and  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Cardross  the  ploughgate  may  be  supposed  to  corre¬ 
spond  with  the  Gaelic  arachor  of  160  acres. 


302 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1322  A.D.' 


populous,  resounding  industry  that  may  be  witnessed 
at  this  day  in  the  same  place.* 

The  manor  house  first  claimed  attention,  cer¬ 
tain  additions  being  made  thereto,  in  order  to  accom¬ 
modate  the  royal  household.  Payments  appear  in 
the  treasurer's  accounts  for  such  things  as  verdigris 
and  olive  oil  for  painting  the  King’s  chamber,  white¬ 
wash  for  the  walls,  glass  for  the  windows  (a  great 
luxury),  a  roof  for  the  falcon-house,  and  a  hedge 
which  was  planted  round  it.  Gilbert  the  gardener 
drew  his  wages,  and  eighteen  pence  for  garden  seeds. 
Elias  the  clerk  and  his  son  Henry  looked  after  the 
granary  ;  Gilliswas  the  huntsman,  William  the  park- 
keeper,  Patrick  the  jester,  and  John,  the  son  of  Gun, 
master  of  the  royal  yacht. f  For  King  Robert  dearly 
loved  the  sea,  and  his  nephew  Moray  was  often  with 
him,  superintending  shipbuilding,  and  putting  his 
name  to  payments  for  sails,  pitch,  iron,  grease,  and 
other  naval  stores. 

Large  expenditure  on  beef,  mutton,  salmon,  had¬ 
docks,  eels,  lampreys,  and  breadstuffs,  attest  the  lib¬ 
eral  scale  of  the  King’s  hospitality.  One  source  of 
constant  expence  was  a  lion,  which  ate  to  the  value 
of  £6  13^.  4 d.  in  a  single  year,  besides  the  wages  of 
a  keeper,  and  the  cost  of  a  cage  and  a  house  for  the 
brute  in  Perth.  For  the  lion  seems  to  have  accom¬ 
panied  the  King  in  some,  at  least,  of  his  frequent 
journeys  to  that  town.  The  King’s  physician,  Ma- 
gister  Malvinus,  lived  in  Perth,  at  the  house  of  John 

*  The  site  of  ancient  Cardross  is  now  surrounded  by  shipbuilding 
yards. 

f  Exchequer  Rolls ,  i.,  127. 


1326  A.D.] 


Negotiations. 


303 


Aylebot,  and  the  royal  patient  had  ever  increasing 
need  for  his  services. 

While  King  Robert  was  enjoying  the  unfamiliar 
ease  and  leisure  of  his  first  season  at  Cardross,  he 
was  visited  by  a  great  sorrow,  in  the  death  of  his  son- 
in-law,  Walter  the  Steward,  who  expired  at  Bathgate 
on  April  9,  1326,  and  was  buried  at  Paisley  Abbey. 
In  him  Scotland  lost  one  of  her  bravest  knights  and 
most  successful  commanders,  and  none  did  more 
than  he  towards  securing  that  throne  for  King  Rob¬ 
ert,  which  his  own  descendants,  though  he  little  sus¬ 
pected  it,  were  to  occupy  for  nearly  four  centuries. 

Early  in  the  same  year,  the  King’s  sister  Christian, 
widow  of  Sir  Christopher  de  Seton,  was  married  to 
Andrew  Moray  of  Bothwell. 

The  Earl  of  Moray  went  to  France  in  the  spring, 
and  concluded  an  alliance,  offensive  and  defensive, 
with  King  Charles  of  France. 

The  Parliament  of  1326,  which  met  at  Cambus- 
kenneth,  is  memorable  as  the  first  in  which  the  rep¬ 
resentatives  of  the  burghs  of  Scotland  sat  with  the 
earls  and  barons.  Hitherto  they  had  possessed  no 
representation  in  the  General  Council,  but  maintained, 
in  addition  to  the  separate  town  councils,  an  in¬ 
definite  convention  of  their  own.  It  is  true  that  in 
some  respects  the  proceedings  at  Cambuskenneth 
were  of  the  nature  of  a  special  assembly,  rather  than 
of  a  Parliament,  for  there  were  no  prelates  summoned 
to  it,  and  some  of  its  acts  seem  to  have  required,  or  at 
least  received,  confirmation  by  the  Parliament  held 
in  Edinburgh  the  following  year.  Moreover,  there 
can  be  little  doubt  that  the  burgesses  were  admitted 
for  the  special  purpose  of  voting  a  grant  to  the  King 


304 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1322-26  A.O.] 


of  the  tenth  penny  out  of  all  rents,  in  consideration  of 
the  depreciation  of  the  royal  lands  in  consequence 
of  the  long  war.  The  fragmentary  records  of  the  sub¬ 
sequent  Parliaments  of  this  reign  and  the  next  do  not 
make  it  clear  that  the  burgesses  were  summoned  to 
them  also  ;  nevertheless,  the  precedent  had  been  set, 
and  it  was  a  far-reaching  one.  The  presence  of  the 
burgesses  in  this  Parliament  was  of  the  greater  mo¬ 
ment,  because  they  were  admitted  thereby  to  the 
discussion  and  settlement  of  the  succession  to  the 
Crown — a  question  reopened  by  the  birth  of  Prince 
David.  An  Act  of  Settlement  was  passed,  but  un¬ 
fortunately  it  has  not  been  preserved.  It  was  lost 
before  the  middle  of  the  17th  century,  but  having 
been  found  on  the  Continent  by  Sir  James  Balfour 
of  Kinnaird,  Lord  Lyon  King-at-arms,  it  was  laid 
before  Charles  II.’s  Parliament  at  Perth  on  Christmas 
Day,  1650.  It  was  ordered  that  the  “  old  monu¬ 
ment  ”  should  be  recorded  in  the  books  of  Parlia¬ 
ment  and  carefully  preserved  ;  but  before  this  could 
be  done,  Cromwell  had  become  ruler  of  Scotland, 
and  ordered  all  the  Scottish  Records  to  be  taken  to 
London.  Afterthe  Restoration  they  were  sent  back 
to  Edinburgh,  but,  as  the  Lords  of  Session  reported 
to  the  House  of  Lords  in  1740,  the  frigate  Eagle,  in 
which  they  had  been  placed  for  transport,  was  over¬ 
taken  by  a  storm.  From  the  Eagle ,  eighty-five 
hogsheads  of  papers  were  transferred  to  another  ves¬ 
sel  which  sank  ;  and  thus  these  priceless  records  were 
lost  for  ever.  As  the  Act  of  Settlement  of  1326  was 
not  among  those  documents  which  ultimately  reached 

Edinburgh,  the  presumption  is  that  it  perished  with 
the  rest. 


Sir  James  de  Douglas. 


Thomas,  Earl  of  Moray. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

THE  CAMPAIGN  OF  WEARDALE  AND  CONCLUSION 

OF  PEACE. 

A.D.  1327-1328. 

THE  melancholy  reign  of  Edward  II.  of  England 
was  brought  to  a  close  by  his  abdication  or 
deposal  on  January  24,  1327.  His  son,  a  boy 
of  fifteen,  was  crowned  as  Edward  III.  at  Westminster 
on  February  9th. 

The  subsequent  sufferings  of  this  unhappy  monarch, 
his  cruel  treatment  when  in  prison  and  the  revolting 
manner  in  which  he  was  done  to  death,  are  matters 
which  have  no  bearing  on  the  course  of  events  in 
Scotland.  It  is  not  for  Scotsmen  to  deplore  the 
character  of  the  second  Edward  as  a  ruler,  seeing 
that  his  incapacity  in  council  and  his  unreadiness  in 
the  field  contributed  almost  as  much  to  the  success 
of  the  struggle  for  independence,  as  did  the  valour 
and  resolution  of  Robert  the  Bruce,  his  captains  and 
his  people.  Sir  Thomas  Gray,  in  pronouncing  the 
following  brief  elegy  upon  Edward  II.,  was  probably 

3°5 


20 


3°6 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1327  A.D.- 


repeating  all  that  his  father,  who  personally  knew 
the  King  well,  had  told  him  in  his  favour:  “he  was 
prudent,  gentle  and  amiable  in  conversation,  but 
maladroit  in  action.”* 

The  immediate  effect  of  the  revolution  in  England 
on  the  prospects  of  peace  between  that  country  and 
Scotland  was  disastrous,  though  there  is  hopeless 
discrepancy  in  the  accounts  given  by  different  his¬ 
torians  regarding  the  circumstances  which  brought 
about  a  renewal  of  hostilities. 

On  the  one  hand,  there  is  the  unimpeachable 
testimony  of  authentic  documents  to  the  fact  that 
on  February  15  th,  three  weeks  after  his  accession, 
Edward  III.  appointed  Henry  de  Percy,  Ralph  de 
Neville,  Roger  Heron,  William  Riddel,  and  Gilbert 
de  Boroughdon,  to  maintain  the  truce  made  by  the 
late  King  with  Robert  de  Brus  and  his  “  fautours  ” ; 
at  the  same  time  empowering  Percy  to  receive  to 
his  peace  all  Scotsmen  who  should  desire  to  come.f 
Further,  on  March  4th,  the  Abbot  de  Rievaulx  and 
Ivo  de  Aldburgh  were  empowered  to  treat  for  peace 
with  Robert  de  Brus,  and  to  swear  that  their  King- 
would  keep  the  truce  meanwhile.  Lastly,  on  March 
6th,  King  Edward  formally  confirmed  the  truce 
made  by  his  father. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  chronicler  of  Lanercost, 
usually  veracious  though  greatly  prejudiced  against 
the  Scots,  circumstantially  declares  that  Norham 
Castle  was  besieged  on  the  very  day  of  Edward’s 
coronation,  but  that  the  assailants  were  repulsed  by 

*  II  fust  sagis,  douce  et  amyable  en  parole  ;  mais  mesoerous  en 
fait. — Scalacronica ,  151. 

f  Bain,  iii.,  165. 


1328  A.D.l 


Campaign  of  Wear  dale.  307 

Robert  de  Manners,  the  constable,  with  a  loss  of 
nine  or  ten  killed,  and  five  prisoners,  who  were 
severely  wounded.  Either  this  must  have  been  a 
local  fray  by  a  party  of  private  marauders,  or  the 
friar,  writing  at  a  very  confusing  time,  has  con¬ 
founded  the  dates. 

The  fact,  however,  remains  that  it  was  the  Scots 
who  broke  the  truce.  Barbour  explains  that  King 
Robert  had  applied  in  vain  for  redress  on  account 
of  various  acts  of  piracy  committed  by  Englishmen 
on  Scottish  shipping,  and  that  therefore  he  sent 
openly  to  King  Edward  renouncing  the  truce. 
Fordun  bluntly  avers  that  the  bad  faith  of  the 
English  had  become  apparent.  Probably  each  na¬ 
tion  was  suspicious  of  the  other.  The  movement 
of  Scottish  troops  towards  the  Border  may  have 
been  no  more  than  a  precautionary  measure,  but  it 
was  interpreted,  not  unnaturally,  as  a  hostile  act. 
The  English  King’s  council  were  advised  that  the 
Scots  intended  instant  invasion,  unless  peace  were 
conceded  on  the  only  terms  acceptable  to  them. 
Consequently,  the  English  barons  were  summoned 
to  meet  their  King  at  Newcastle  on  April  5th, 
where  preparations  on  a  large  scale  were  made  for 
the  invasion  of  Scotland.  The  city  of  London,  says 
the  author  of  the  Pauline  Annals,  sent  one  hundred 
well  equipped  volunteers — mera  volimtate — by  purely 
free  will.  But  in  addition  to  native  troops,  the 
young  King  of  England  secured  the  services  of 
2500  German  cavalry  under  John  of  Hainault,* 

*  Brother  of  the  Count  of  Hainault.  His  real  title  was  Lord  of 
Beaumont.  He  had  been  serving  lately  in  the  war  of  Queen  Isabella 
of  England  with  her  son,  Edward  II. 


3°8 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1327  A.D.- 


for  which  he  agreed  to  pay  the  enormous  sum  of 

£14,000. 

And  now  once  more  the  bale-fires  flared  along  the 
Border  heights  ;  once  more  the  Border  farmers  were 
summoned  from  peaceful  toil,  to  reap  a  bloodier 
harvest  than  they  had  sown.  Moray  and  Douglas 
entered  England  by  the  western  march  on  June  15th. 
Froissart  has  given  the  following  description  of  the 
light  cavalry,  of  which  the  Scottish  army  was  chiefly 
composed  on  this  expedition : 

“  The  Scots  are  bold,  hardy,  and  much  inured  to  war.  When  they 
make  their  invasions  into  England,  they  march  from  20  to  24  miles 
without  halting,  as  well  by  night  as  by  day  ;  for  they  are  all  on  horse¬ 
back,  except  the  camp-followers,  who  are  on  foot.  The  knights  and 
squires  are  well  mounted  on  large  bay  horses,  the  common  people  on 
little  nags.  They  bring  no  carriages  with  them  on  account  of  the 
mountains  they  have  to  pass  in  Northumberland  :  neither  do  they 
carry  with  them  any  provisions  of  bread  or  wine  ;  for  their  habits  of 
sobriety  are  such  in  time  of  war  that  they  will  live  for  a  long  time  on 
flesh  half-sodden,  without  bread,  and  drink  the  river  water  without 
tvine.  They  have  therefore  no  occasion  for  pots  or  pans,  for  they 
dress  the  flesh  of  their  cattle  in  the  skins,  after  they  have  taken  them 
off  ;  and  being  sure  to  find  plenty  of  cattle  in  the  country  which  they 
invade,  they  carry  none  with  them.  Under  the  flap  of  his  saddle 
each  man  carries  a  broad  plate  of  metal  ;  behind  the  saddle,  a  little 
bag  of  oatmeal  ;  when  they  have  eaten  too  much  of  the  sodden 
flesh,  and  their  stomachs  appear  weak  and  empty,  they  place  this 
plate  over  the  fire,  mix  their  oatmeal  with  water,  and,  when  the  plate 
is  heated,  they  put  a  little  of  the  paste  upon  it  and  make  a  thin  cake, 
like  a  cracknel  or  biscuit,  which  they  eat  to  warm  their  stomachs.* 
In  this  manner  the  Scots  entered  England,  destroying  and  burning 
everything  as  they  passed.  Their  army  consisted  of  4000  men  at 
arms,  knights,  and  esquires,  well  mounted  ;  besides  20,000  men,f 

*  An  exact  description  of  oatcake  as  still  made  in  Scotland. 

f  These  figures  must  be  taken  with  the  usual  reserve.  Barbour  is 


1328  A.D.] 


Campaign  of  Wear  dale. 


309 


bold  and  hardy,  armed  after  the  manner  of  their  country,  and 
mounted  upon  little  hackneys,  that  are  never  tied  up  or  dressed,  but 
turned  immediately  after  the  day’s  march  to  pasture  on  the  heath  or 
in  the  fields.  This  army  was  commanded  by  two  valiant  captains. 
The  King  of  Scotland  himself,  who  had  been  very  brave,  yet  being 
old  and  labouring  under  a  leprosy,  appointed  for  one  that  gallant 
prince  so  renowned  in  arms,  the  Earl  of  Moray.  .  .  .  The  other 

was  Sir  James  Douglas,  esteemed  the  bravest  and  most  enterprising 
Knight  in  the  two  Kingdoms.” 

Set  against  this  the  reference  by  Holinshed  to  the 
contrast  between  the  soldiery  of  the  two  nations, 
and  it  is  not  difficult  to  realise  what  led  the  Scots 
in  later  years  to  nickname  their  hereditary  foes  the 
“  pock-puddings.” 

“  Bicause  the  English  souldiers  of  this  armie  were  cloathed  all  in 
cotes  and  hoods  embrodered  with  floures  and  branches  verie  seemlie, 
and  vsed  to  nourish  their  beards,  the  Scots  in  derision  thereof  made 
a  rime,  which  they  fastened  vpon  the  church  doores  of  saint  Peter- 
toward-Stangate,  conteining  this  that  followeth  : 

Longe  beardes,  hartelesse, 

Paynted  hoodes,  witlesse, 

Gaie  cotes,  gracelesse, 

Make  Englande  thriftlesse.” 

These  gay  coats  were  the  liveries  of  the  great 
feudal  barons,  with  whom  it  was  a  point  of  honour 
to  excel  in  the  splendour  of  their  retinues ;  but 
many  years  of  enforced  economy  had  taught  the 
Scots  lords  to  despise,  or  at  least  to  dispense  with, 
such  magnificence.  The  troops,  however,  thus  de¬ 
scribed  were  drawn  from  the  midland  and  southern 

more  likely  to  be  right  in  mentioning  10,000  “guid  men.”  Sir  T. 
Gray  says  that  “  restoit  ge  poy  des  gentz  ” — they  were  only  a  few  in 
number — compared,  that  is,  to  the  English  army. 


3IQ 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1327  A.D.- 


counties.  The  English  Border  riders  were  quite  as 
hardy  as  the  Scots. 

Young  Donald  of  Mar,  who  had  been  brought  up 
at  the  English  Court,  but  had  lately  joined  his  kins¬ 
man  King  Robert,  rode  with  the  Scottish  host. 
Shortly  before  Midsummer  Day  they  marched 
through  Northumberland  into  Weardale,  meeting 
with  scarcely  any  opposition,  and  wasting  all  as  they 
went.  Then  they  turned  into  Westmorland,  and  we 
catch  a  glimpse  of  them  in  a  letter  received  by  the 
King  of  England,  who  lay  at  Durham.  It  was 
written  by  his  uncle,  the  Earl  of  Kent,  on  July  4th, 
telling  him  that  “  on  this  Friday,”  just  as  he  was 
going  to  bed — q  jeo  devoi  cockier — came  news  that 
the  Scots  were  at  Appleby,  and  that  he  and  his 
troops  had  remained  under  arms  all  night  watching 
for  them.  He  begged  to  be  excused  from  attending 
the  King’s  muster,  as  he  must  watch  the  invaders. 
He  had  ordered  all  the  empty  houses  in  the  district 
to  be  set  on  fire,  so  as  to  warn  the  people  to  be  on 
the  alert — a  simple  and  effective  system  of  teleg¬ 
raphy,  but  costly  withal. 

On  receiving  this  news,  King  Edward  ordered  up 
reinforcements  from  York,  and  set  out  to  intercept 
the  Scots.  He  had  no  doubt  a  very  large  army  un¬ 
der  his  command,  but  the  estimates  given  by  differ¬ 
ent  historians,  varying  from  50,000  to  100,000,  must 
be  far  beyond  the  mark.  The  very  greatness  of  Ed¬ 
ward’s  host  put  him  at  a  disadvantage  in  attempting 
to  overtake  his  nimble  foe.  Reconnoitring  parties 
ran  the  risk  of  being  cut  to  pieces  if  they  came  up 
with  the  Scots  and  heavily  armed  troops  could  not 


1328  A.  D.]  Campaign  of  Wear  dale.  31 1 

move  fast  enough  to  be  effective.  So  the  English 
army  lay  at  Haydon  Bridge  on  the  Tyne  till  after 
July  26th,  suffering  severely  from  want  of  supplies 
and  showing  serious  signs  of  mutiny.  Moreover^ 
the  weather  had  broken  ;  the  Tyne  was  swollen  by 
heavy  rains,  and  the  army,  lying  part  on  one  bank, 
part  on  the  other,  could  not  be  united. 

The  Scots  were  faring  well,  in  spite  of  the  storm. 
A  letter,  indeed,  addressed  to  King  Edward  on  July 
26th,  expresses  the  anonoymous  writer  s  satisfaction 
because  the  invaders  have  been  u  forclos,”  by  the 
aid  of  God,  from  re-entering  their  own  land  ;  but,  so 
far  from  being  in  difficulties,  or  desiring  to  return  to 
Scotland,  Douglas  and  Moray,  after  raiding  Coquet- 
dale,  were  securely  encamped  on  the  banks  of  the 
Wear. 

The  King  of  England  offered  the  reward  of  knight¬ 
hood  and  a  landed  estate  worth  one  hundred  pounds 
to  any  one  who  should  bring  him  within  sight  of  the 
enemy,  where  they  could  be  approached  on  hard 
ground.*  Many  knights  and  esquires,  therefore, 
swam  the  river  and  rode  over  the  country,  seeking 
to  earn  the  guerdon. 

As  soon  as  the  Tyne  was  fordable,  Edward  crossed 
the  river  at  Haltwhistle,  and  the  whole  English 
army  marched  through  the  hills  in  a  southerly  direc¬ 
tion.  On  the  fourth  day  Thomas  de  Rokeby,  an 
esquire  who  had  set  out  in  quest  of  the  Scots,  rode 
into  camp  with  the  desired  information.  He  had 
fallen  in  with  the  enemy  and  been  taken  prisoner  ; 
but  so  soon  as  he  frankly  told  them  his  errand,  he 


*  Kn  lieu  dur  et  secke. — Fcedera. 


3 1 2 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1327  A.D.- 


was  set  free,  and  told  to  make  haste  and  tell  his 
master  that  Moray  and  Douglas  had  been  waiting 
eight  days  for  him,  and  were  eager  to  do  battle. 
Rokeby  guided  his  friends  to  the  Scottish  position, 
a  steep  hill  on  the  further  or  south  bank  of  the 
Wear.* 

When  the  two  armies  were  near  each  other,  Moray 
sent  out  Douglas  to  reconnoitre,  remaining  himself 
in  command  of  the  camp.  Douglas  brought  back 
word  that  the  English  were  in  great  strength,  and 
were  advancing  in  seven  divisions. 

“We  shall  give  them  battle,”  exclaimed  Moray, 
“though  they  were  many  times  as  strong.” 

“Praised  be  God!”  replied  Douglas,  “that  we 
have  such  a  daring  commander,  but,  by  St.  Bride  ! 
if  you  follow  my  advice,  you  will  not  engage  unless 
we  have  the  advantage.  There  is  no  dishonour  in 
stratagem,  seeing  we  are  so  few  against  so  many.” 

Luckily  the  Earl  of  Moray,  who  held  the  chief 
command  in  virtue  of  his  kinship  to  the  King  of 
Scots,  was  not  so  hot-headed  as  to  overrule  the 
counsel  of  his  experienced  lieutenant.  Throughout 
the  long  story  of  the  War  of  Independence,  there  is 
never  a  trace  of  anything  but  generous  knightly 
rivalry  between  these  two  great  soldiers — the  right 
and  left  hands  of  their  King. 

The  English  sent  forth  heralds,  offering  to  allow 
the  Scots  to  cross  the  river  unmolested,  so  as  to  do 

*  Barbour  distinctly  says  the  Scots  were  on  the  north  bank  and  the 
English  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  river.  But  the  dates  of  Ed¬ 
ward’s  correspondence  show  that  he  was  at  Stanhope,  on  the  north 
bank,  on  August  3d  (Bain,  iii.,  168). 


1328  A.D.] 


Campaign  of  Wear  dale . 


3l3 


fair  battle  on  the  plain  ;  or,  if  they  preferred  it,  that 
the  English  should  cross  without  opposition,  and 
fight  on  the  south  side.  Both  proposals  were  de 
dined.  The  Scots  sent  back  a  message  to  say  that 
as  they  had  come  without  leave  of  the  King  of  Eng¬ 
land  and  his  lords,  so  now  they  intended  to  choose 
their  own  time  to  return.  It  is  said  that  on  hearing- 
this  taunt,  John  of  Hainault  and  some  English 
knights  were  eager  to  cross  the  stream  and  attack 
the  Scots  without  parley,  but  that  the  jealousy  about 
precedence  prevented  anything  being  done.  It  was 
decided  therefore  that  the  position  of  the  Scots  was 
impregnable,  and  preparations  were  made  for  starv¬ 
ing  them  out. 

For  two  or  three  days  the  two  armies  lay  facing 
each  other;  but  the  tedium  was  relieved  by  sundry 
dashing  deeds  of  arms.  One  morning,  a  thousand 
English  archers,  supported  by  a  body  of  men-at- 
arms,  were  sent  out  to  harass  the  Scots  by  a  flank 
attack.  Douglas,  observing  the  movement,  placed 
a  body  of  cavalry  in  ambush  under  his  youngest 
brother,  Archibald,  and  the  young  Earl  of  Mar. 
Then,  with  a  cloak  thrown  over  his  armour,  he  rode 
to  and  fro  between  the  advancing  archers  and  the 
Scottish  flank,  luring  them  gradually  towards  the 
ambuscade.  An  English  squire,  Robert  of  Ogle, 
recognising  Douglas,  galloped  forward  to  warn  the 
archers  of  their  danger.  But  it  was  too  late  :  Douglas 
gave  the  signal :  the  concealed  horsemen  swept  down, 
scattering  the  sharpshooters  along  the  hillside,  cut¬ 
ting  some  down,  spearing  others,  and  driving  the 
rest  across  the  river.  Sir  William  Erskine,  having 


3H 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1327  A.D.- 


received  knighthood  that  very  morning,  used  his 
new  gilt  spurs  to  such  purpose  that,  charging  far 
ahead  of  his  men,  he  was  taken  prisoner.  So  many 
English,  however,  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Scots, 
that  his  exchange  was  easily  arranged. 

On  another  occasion  the  English  very  nearly  suc¬ 
ceeded  in  tempting  the  Scots  from  their  entrench¬ 
ments.  A  large  body  having  been  sent  round  by 
night  to  occupy  a  wooded  valley  in  rear  of  Moray’s 
position,  the  English  made  a  feint  of  attacking  him 
in  front.  The  Scots  had  already  begun  to  move 
down  to  meet  them  on  the  slopes,  when  scouts 
brought  word  to  Douglas  that  his  rear  was  threat¬ 
ened.  Instantly  he  ordered  the  troops  back  to 
their  original  ground,  and  fortunately  he  was  able 
to  enforce  the  order;  for  had  the  two  armies 
once  engaged,  the  concealed  force  would  have  oc¬ 
cupied  the  camp  in  rear  of  the  Scots,  who  could  not 
have  failed  to  be  overpowered  by  sheer  weight  of 
numbers. 

That  same  night  the  Scots  tricked  their  powerful 
enemy  to  some  purpose.  Leaving  their  camp-fires 
burning  brightly,  they  silently  decamped.  The 
English  awoke  to  find  the  hill  deserted,  and  the 
Scots  still  more  strongly  posted  than  before,  on  a 
thickly  wooded  height  about  two  miles  distant. 
Edward  moved  along  the  river  and  encamped  at 
Stanhope,  opposite  their  new  position. 

Barbour  here  either  draws  on  his  imagination,  or 
has  been  misled  by  his  informants.  He  says  that  the 
two  armies  lay  opposite  one  another  for  eight  days, 
and  that  sharp  skirmishing  went  on  daily.  Sir 


1328  A.D.] 


Campaign  of  Weardale. 


3i5 


Thomas  Gray,  also,  says  that  six  days  were  spent 
thus ;  but  examination  of  the  records  proves,  by 
the  dates  on  various  papers,  that  Froissart  was  right 
in  his  statement  that  it  was  on  the  first  night  in  the 
new  encampment,  probably  August  3d,  that  Douglas 
made  his  famous  camisade. 

Selecting  200  horsemen  of  the  best,  he  crossed 
the  river  at  some  distance  from  the  camps,  and  rode 
towards  the  English  lines.  On  approaching  an  out¬ 
post  he  cried — “  Ha!  St.  George  !  no  watch  here  !  ” 
and  was  mistaken  for  an  officer  going  his  rounds. 
Then  he  led  his  party  into  the  camp  at  a  gallop, 
cutting  the  tent  ropes  as  they  passed  and  killing 
every  man  who  stood  in  their  way.  Douglas  pressed 
on  straight  to  the  royal  pavilion,  where,  had  it  not 
been  for  the  devotion  of  the  chaplain  and  other 
attendants,  who  sacrificed  their  own  lives  to  save  the 
King,  Edward  would  assuredly  have  perished.  As 
it  was,  he  had  a  full  narrow  escape.  But  the  alarm 
had  been  raised :  the  whole  camp  was  astir,  and 
Douglas,  sounding  a  preconcerted  note  on  his  horn, 
drew  off  his  men  with  the  loss  of  very  few.* 

Returning  to  his  own  quarters,  Douglas  found  the 
Scots  all  under  arms.  Moray  asked  him  what  he 
had  been  doing  and  how  he  had  fared. 

il  Sir,”  answered  Douglas,  with  Johnsonian  brev¬ 
ity,  “  vve  have  drawn  blood.” 

“Had  we  all  gone  there,”  observed  Moray,  “we 
should  have  defeated  them  completely. 

To  which  Douglas  made  answer  that,  in  his  opin¬ 
ion,  the  small  party  he  had  with  him  was  quite  enough 


*  Froissart. 


316 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1327  A.D.- 


to  risk  in  such  an  adventure.  Then  Moray  began  to 
urge  Douglas  once  more  to  consent  to  a  pitched  bat¬ 
tle.  What  follows  in  Barbour’s  poem  may  not,  in¬ 
deed,  bean  unvarnished  record  of  the  facts,  but  it  is 
too  lively  to  be  passed  over  in  silence.  Douglas  ad¬ 
vised  his  chief  to  treat  the  English  as  a  fox  treated 
a  certain  fisherman.  Returning  one  night  from  his 
nets,  this  fisherman  found  that  a  fox  had  entered 
his  cottage  and  was  eating  a  salmon.  Placing  him¬ 
self  in  the  doorway  the  man  drew  a  sword  to  kill  the 
thief  withal.  The  fox,  perceiving  that  the  door  was 
the  only  outlet,  was  perplexed  what  to  do.  The 
fisherman’s  cloak  lay  on  the  bed  ;  the  cunning  beast 
seized  it  and  drew  it  across  the  fire,  whereupon  the 
owner,  when  he  saw  his  good  cloak  burning,  ran  for¬ 
ward  to  save  it,  leaving  the  door  unguarded,  of  which 
the  fox  took  advantage  to  make  his  escape. 

“Now,”  said  Douglas,  “  we  Scots  are  the  fox  and 
the  King  of  England  is  the  fisherman.  He  stands 
in  the  door  and  will  not  let  us  return  to  our  own 
land.  But  not  only  did  the  fisherman  lose  his  sal¬ 
mon  :  his  mantle  was  burnt  and  the  fox  escaped.  I 
have  caused  a  way  of  escape  to  be  spied  out  for  us ; 
even  if  it  be  somewhat  wet,  we  shall  not  lose  so  much 
as  a  single  page  in  taking  it.” 

All  next  day,  Aug.  4th,*  a  great  show  of  prepara¬ 
tion  was  kept  up  in  the  Scottish  camp.  A  Scottish 

*  I  have  altered  the  dates  given  by  Lord  Hailes  in  conformity  with 
King  Edward’s  movements  as  attested  in  the  Records,  to  which  Lord 
Hailes  had  not  access.  But  it  is  possible  that  Edward  betook  him¬ 
self  to  Durham  immediately  after  the  camisade,  leaving  his  army  in 
their  camp  at  Stanhope. 


1328  A.D.] 


Campaign  of  Wear  dale.  3 1  7 

soldier,  having  purposely  allowed  himself  to  be  taken 
prisoner,  told  the  English  that  orders  had  been  issued 
by  Moray  that  all  were  to  be  under  arms  at  a  given  . 
hour  after  sunset.  Determined  not  to  be  surprised 
again,  the  English  remained  on  the  alert  all  night, 
awaiting  attack.  In  the  morning,  two  Scottish  trum¬ 
peters  who  had  been  left  to  blow  deceptive  calls  dur¬ 
ing  the  darkness,  were  brought  in  prisoners.  They 
reported  that  the  Scots  had  decamped  again,  and 
were  on  the  march  towards  the  Border.  At  first  this 
story  was  disbelieved,  and  the  English,  suspecting  a 
ruse,  remained  in  order  of  battle  for  several  hours ; 
but  at  length  their  scouts  returned,  and  confirmed 
the  exasperating  truth  that  the  enemy  had  given 
them  the  slip  for  the  second  time.  Their  escape — 

“  sumdele  wat,”  as  Douglas  had  premised — had  been 
made  across  a  great  morass  lying  in  rear  of  their 
position.  Over  this  a  roadway  of  branches,  strong 
enough  to  bear  horses,  had  been  laid,  and  was  taken 
up  by  the  rear-guard,  in  order  to  prevent  pursuit. 

The  Scots  had  not  marched  many  miles  on  their 
retreat  before  they  fell  in  with  the  Earl  of  March 
and  John  the  Steward,  coming  to  their  assistance 
with  5000  men  ;  for  there  had  been  great  anxiety  in 
Scotland  about  the  prolonged  absence  of  Moray  and 
Douglas. 

As  for  the  boy  King  of  England,  he  shed  tears  of 
vexation  at  the  issue  of  his  mighty  preparations* 
His  great  armament  was  disbanded  at  York  on  Au¬ 
gust  15th.  The  German  heavy  cavalry  under  John 
of  Hainault,  on  which  so  much  store  had  been  set 


*  Le  roy,  vn  innocent,  plora  des  oils. — Scalacronica,  155. 


3i8 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1327  A.D.- 


and  for  which  so  large  a  price  had  to  be  paid,  were 
obliged  to  buy  remounts  at  York,  for  their  war- 
horses  had  foundered  or  died  under  the  severities  of 
a  few  weeks  in  the  open. 

Attempts  have  been  made  by  some  of  the  English 
chroniclers  to  account  for  the  failure  of  Edward 
III.’s  first  campaign  by  making  a  charge  of  treachery 
against  Mortimer,  whom  they  accuse  of  having  taken 
a  bribe  of  £20,000  to  let  the  Scots  escape;  but,  as 
Lord  Hailes  points  out,  this,  had  it  been  true,  cer¬ 
tainly  would  have  formed  one  of  the  counts  in  the 
subsequent  indictment  of  Mortimer.  He  was,  in¬ 
deed,  charged  on  his  trial  with  having  embezzled 
money  paid  by  the  Scots,  but  that  was  a  sum  stipu¬ 
lated  for  under  the  treaty  of  1328,  the  year  follow¬ 
ing  the  campaign  of  Weardale.  Froissart  would 
have  been  sure  to  hear,  and  equally  sure  to  make 
mention,  of  any  underhand  transactions  between 
Mortimer  and  Moray;  but  he  never  hints  at  any 
cause  for  the  failure  of  the  English  at  Stanhope, 
except  that  they  were  fairly  outgeneralled. 

During  the  autumn  of  1327  one  of  the  few  Scot¬ 
tish  barons  who  remained  in  the  English  interest 
went  to  his  rest,  namely  Sir  Dougall  Macdouall  of 
Galloway.  He  had  petitioned  Edward  II.  for  the 
grant  of  certain  lands  in  Ireland,  to  compensate  him 
for  those  he  had  lost  in  Scotland,  and  was  told  in 
reply  to  go  and  serve  the  King  in  Ireland  and  he 
would  be  rewarded  according  to  his  “  bon  port.”* 
He  went  there,  accordingly,  in  1316,  with  his  kins- 


*  Bain,  iii.,  157. 


1328  A.D.] 


Campaign  of  Wear  dale. 


3*9 


man,  John  of  Lorn,*  and  seems  to  have  given  satis¬ 
faction,  for  he  received  an  annuity,  and,  in  1326,  the 
year  before  his  death,  a  grant  of  lands  in  Cumber¬ 
land  and  Yorkshire. 

The  action  of  the  King  of  Scots  during  the  cam¬ 
paign  of  Weardale  has  been  greatly  misunderstood  *■ 
until  quite  lately.  It  has  been  generally  believed 
that  his  ill  health  condemned  him  to  repose,  while 
his  lieutenants  were  carrying  on  the  war.  Nearly  all 
historians  say  that  he  was  suffering  from  leprosy  ; 
and  so,  no  doubt,  he  was,  or  from  a  painful  disease 
which  went  by  that  name.  Now,  however,  the  re¬ 
searches  of  Mr.  Bain  in  the  Public  Record  Office 
have  brought  to  light  two  documents  which  prove 
beyond  question  that,  so  far  from  being  inactive, 
King  Robert  planned  and  conducted  an  expedition 
into  Ireland,  in  order  to  create  a  diversion  in  favour 
of  his  generals  in  the  north  of  England. f 

Of  the  incidents  and  course  of  this  campaign  there 
is,  unfortunately,  no  record.  No  allusion  to  it  has 
been  noticed  in  any  of  the  Irish  annals ;  neither  does 
Barbour,  the  chief  panegyrist  of  the  Bruce,  make 
mention  of  it,  whence  it  may  be  assumed  that,  if  it 
ever  came  to  the  knowledge  of  the  poet,  the  facts 
were  not  of  a  kind  to  add  lustre  to  the  memory  of 
his  hero. 

The  two  authentic  references  to  the  expedition  are 
these:  First,  an  instrument  whereby,  on  July  12, 
1327,  King  Robert,  being  then  at  Glendun  in  Antrim, 
grants  truce  for  a  year  to  Henry  de  Maundeville,  the 


*  Bain,  iii.,  92. 
f  Ibid. ,  Introduction. 


320 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1327  A.D.- 


English  seneschal  of  Ulster,  and  his  people,  on  con¬ 
dition  of  their  delivering  ioo  “  cendres  ”  of  wheat 
and  the  like  quantity  of  barley  in  the  haven  of 
Wlringfirth  *  Second,  a  letter  written  about  the  year 
1335  by  John  le  fitz  William  Jordan,  and  addressed 
to  Edward  III.,  wherein  the  writer  claims  reward  for 
good  service  done  in  1327,  when  Sir  Robert  de  Bruys 
was  baulked  of  his  design  on  arriving  in  Ireland,  by 
treachery — par  faux  covine — on  the  part  of  the 
Irish,  as  shown  in  a  return  laid  before  the  King  and 
Council  in  1332,  when  ^50  a  year  had  been  granted 
to  him  for  life.f  From  this  it  may  be  inferred  that 
King  Robert  was  disappointed  in  the  expectation  he 
had  been  led  to  form  of  a  fresh  rising  of  the  Ulster¬ 
men  against  their  English  rulers,  and  that  fitz 
William  in  thwarting  his  purpose,  had  rendered 
service  sufficiently  valuable  to  deserve  such  a  large 
pension. 

Robert,  however,  returned  to  Scotland  in  time  to 
take  an  active  part  in  operations  on  the  Border.  He 
divided  the  Scottish  army  into  three  corps,  one  of 
which  laid  siege  to  that  object  of  envy,  Norham 
Castle,  where  Sir  Robert  de  Manners  made  a  good 
defence.  Moray  and  Douglas  marched  through 
Northumberland  to  Alnwick  Castle,  which  they  be¬ 
sieged  ineffectively  ;  though  the  occasion  was  one, 
says  Sir  Thomas  Gray,  of  many  formal  combats  ac¬ 
cording  to  the  strict  rules  of  chivalry — par  couenant 
taille .  The  third  corps  was  led  by  King  Robert  in 


*  The  Norse  name  for  Larne  Lough.  Bain,  in.,  167. 
\  Ibid.,  216. 


1328  A.D.]  Campaign  of  Weai'dale. 


32 1 


person,  and  careered  unchecked  through  parts  of 
Northumberland  and  Durham,  seeking  what  they 
might  devour,  which,  by  this  time,  must  have  been 
little  enough.  The  natives  of  this  district,  left  to 
their  own  resources,  bought  a  truce  to  last  till  Pen¬ 
tecost,  1328. 

Moray  and  Douglas  drew  off  from  Alnwick,  find¬ 
ing  it  too  strong  for  them,  and  joined  their  forces  to 
those  lying  near  Berwick.  No  sooner  did  he  see  the 
country  clear  of  Scots,  than  Henry  de  Percy  rode 
forth  on  a  foray  in  Teviotdale.  Hearing  of  this, 
Douglas  determined  to  intercept  him  on  his  return, 
and  barred  the  road  to  Alnwick.  Percy,  however,  by 
a  night  march  managed  to  avoid  him,  and  made  good 
his  return  to  his  own  castle.* 

By  this  short  autumn  campaign  the  long  series  of 
the  Bruce’s  victories  was  brought  to  a  close. 

The  English  Parliament  had  been  summoned  to 
meet  at  Lincoln  to  take  measures  for  carrying  on 
the  Scottish  war.  But  the  military  resources  of  Eng¬ 
land  were  at  a  low  ebb  ;  funds  were  not  forthcoming 
even  to  pay  the  foreign  auxiliaries  in  the  late  cam¬ 
paign  in  Weardale.  Moreover,  the  barons  were 
quarrelling  among  themselves,  and  the  authority  of 
the  young  monarch,  who  was  under  the  management 
of  his  mother  and  Mortimer,  was  far  from  secure. 
The  debates  in  Parliament  took  a  turn  which  can 
have  been  little  expected  in  Scotland,  and  it  was 

*  Sir  Thomas  Gray,  who,  as  a  Northumberland  knight  and  a  near 
neighbour  to  Percy,  must  have  known  all  about  this  affair,  presents  it 
in  the  light  of  a  rout  rather  than  a  forced  march — “taunt  estoient 
lez  Engles  mescharnis  en  le  hour  de  guer”  ( Scalacronica ,  155). 


322 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1327  A.D.- 


resolved  to  make  overtures  for  a  renewal  of  the 
truce. 

It  has  been  mentioned  above  that  the  Scots  have 
been  generally  accused  of  having  been  the  first  to 
break  the  last  truce  concluded  with  Edward  II.,  and 
that  there  is  good  reason  to  suppose  that  they  act¬ 
ually  did  so.  But  the  Lincoln  Parliament  must  have 
been  satisfied  that  they  had  not  done  so  without 
justification,  else  it  would  have  been  folly  to  attempt 
another  treaty  with  a  monarch  and  a  people  so  little 
to  be  trusted.  For  King  Robert’s  action  in  re-open¬ 
ing  hostilities  there  must  have  been  grounds,  un¬ 
known  to  us,  but  recognised  as  valid  by  the  English 
council.  A  lawyer  called  John  de  Denoun  was  sent 
to  King  Robert,  then  busy  at  the  siege  of  Norham 
Castle,  with  proposals  for  the  marriage  of  Princess 
Johanna,  sister  of  Edward  III.,  to  Prince  David,  the 
heir  of  Scotland.  This  was  a  dramatic  interruption 
of  the  labours  of  war.  Of  course  it  meant  peace — 
such  peace  as  King  Robert  had  always  been  ready 
to  accept — peace  with  honour.  It  meant  that  for 
which  torrents  of  blood  had  flowed,  for  which  tens 
of  thousands  of  homesteads  had  been  given  to  the 
flames,  for  which  the  industry  and  commerce  of  both 
countries  had  been  squandered  for  more  than  a  gen¬ 
eration.  It  meant  that,  at  the  moment  when  it  was 
least  looked  for,  the  independence  of  Scotland  was 
to  be  admitted  by  the  only  ruler  who  questioned  it, 
and  that  she  was  to  gain  at  length  the  management 
of  her  own  affairs  without  foreign  interference.  The 
whole  weary  controversy,  which,  but  for  the  resolu¬ 
tion  and  devotion  of  the  slaughtered  Wallace,  might 


1328  A.D.]  Campaign  of  Weardale . 


323 


have  gone  by  default  against  the  nation  more  than 
thirty  years  before,  was  about  to  be  solved  suddenly 
and  laid  to  perpetual  rest. 

Denoun’s  overtures  being  most  favourably  received 
by  the  Kang  of  Scots,  he  and  Henry  de  Percy  were 
appointed  King  Edward’s  plenipotentiaries  for  re¬ 
viving  the  thirteen  years  truce,  or,  if  possible,  arrang¬ 
ing  a  permanent  peace  between  the  nations.  Warlike 
operations  were  suspended  at  once,  and,  other  pleni¬ 
potentiaries  having  been  appointed,  preliminary  arti¬ 
cles  were  drawn  up  at  Newcastle  on  November  23d, 
Douglas  and  Mortimer  acting  as  the  principal  com¬ 
missioners  on  either  side. 

On  December  10,  1327,  Edward  III.  issued  sum¬ 
mons  to  his  Parliament  to  meet  at  York  on  February 
8th  following,  to  deliberate  on  the  terms  to  be  sub¬ 
mitted  to  the  commissioners.  A  temporary  truce 
was  concluded  on  January  25,  1328,  and  one  hundred 
Scots  received  safe-conducts  to  pass  to  York  to 
attend  the  deliberations,  King  Edward  instructing 
his  officials  to  treat  them  with  proper  respect. 

The  Scots,  being  undoubtedly  in  the  stronger 
position  of  the  two  nations,  were  able  to  insist, 
as  a  preliminary  to  all  other  conditions,  that  the 
English  claim  to  superiority  should  be  absolutely 
renounced.  This  was  enacted  at  York  on  March  1st, 
King  Edward  “  willed  and  consented,  that  the  said 
kingdom,  according  to  its  ancient  boundaries  observed 
in  the  days  of  Alexander  HI.,  should  remain  unto 
Robert  King  of  Scots,  his  heirs  and  successors,  free 
and  divided  from  the  Kingdom  of  England,  without 
any  subjection,  right  of  service,  claim  or  demand 


3^4 


Robert  the  Briice. 


[1327  A.D.- 


whatever  ;  and  that  all  writings  which  might  have 
been  executed  at  any  time  to  the  contrary  should 
be  held  as  void  and  of  no  effect.”  * 

In  the  Chronicle  of  Lanercost  this  concession  is 
attributed,  in  the  first  place,  to  the  evil  counsel 
pessimo  consilio — of  the  Queen  Dowager  of  England 
and  of  Mortimer,  who  undoubtedly  directed  the 
national  policy  during  the  boyhood  of  the  King ; 
and,  in  the  second  place,  to  the  arrival,  while  Parlia¬ 
ment  was  sitting,  of  the  news  that  Charles,  King  of 
France  and  Navarre,  was  dead.  Edward  III.  claimed 
to  be  nearest  heir  to  his  throne,  and  wished  to  have 
the  Scottish  quarrel  off  his  hands,  so  that  he  might 
be  free  to  vindicate  his  title. 

The  chief  obstacle  to  amicable  relations  having 
been  thus  removed,  the  remaining  articles  of  the 
peace  were  easily  agreed  to.  The  York  Parliament 
was  prorogued  and  met  again  at  Northampton, 
where  the  final  treaty  was  arranged.  Of  this,  neither 
the  original  nor  any  transcript  has  been  preserved, 
but  Lord  Hailes  drew  up  the  following  summary  of 
its  provisions,  collected  “  from  a  careful  examination 
of  public  instruments  and  of  the  writings  of  ancient 
historians  ”  : 

1.  There  shall  be  a  perpetual  peace  between  the  two  kingdoms  of 
England  and  Scotland. 

2.  The  stone  on  which  the  Kings  of  Scotland  were  wont  to  sit  at 
the  time  of  their  coronation  shall  be  restored  to  the  Scots. 

3.  The  King  of  England  engages  to  employ  his  good  offices  at 
the  Papal  Court  for  obtaining  the  revocation  of  all  spiritual  processes 
depending  before  the  Holy  See  against  the  King  of  Scots  or  against 
his  kingdom  or  subjects. 


*  Hailes,  ii.,  157. 


1328  A.D.] 


Campaign  of  Weardale. 


325 


4.  For  these  causes  and  in  order  to  make  reparation  for  the  ravages 
committed  in  England  by  the  Scots,  the  King  of  Scots  shall  pay 
30,000  marks  (^20,000)  to  the  King  of  England,  to  be  paid  at  the 
rate  of  10,000  marks  annually  on  St.  John’s  day.* * * § 

5.  Restitution  shall  be  made  of  the  possessions  belonging  to  ecclesi¬ 
astics  in  either  kingdom,  whereof  they  may  have  been  deprived  during 
the  war. 

6.  But  there  shall  not  be  any  restitution  made  of  inheritances  which 
have  fallen  into  the  hands  of  the  King  of  England  or  of  the  King  of 
Scots,  by  reason  of  the  war  between  the  two  nations,  or  through  the 
forfeiture  of  previous  possessors. 

7.  But  Thomas  Lord  Wake  of  Liddel,  Henry  de  Beaumont  Earl  of 
Buchan,  f  and  Henry  de  Percy  J  shall  be  restored  to  their  lordships, 
lands  and  estates,  whereof  the  King  of  Scots,  by  reason  of  the  war 
between  the  two  nations,  had  taken  possession. 

8.  Johanna,  sister  of  the  King  of  England,  shall  be  given  in  mar¬ 
riage  to  David,  the  son  and  heir  of  the  King  of  Scots. 

9.  The  King  of  Scots  shall  provide  the  Princess  Johanna  in  a 
jointure  of  ^2000  yearly,  secured  on  lands  and  rents,  according  to  a 
reasonable  estimation. § 

10.  If  either  of  the  parties  fail  in  performing  the  conditions  of  this 
treaty,  he  shall  pay  2000  pounds  of  silver  into  the  Papal  treasury. 

Perhaps  the  first  point  in  these  articles  to  strike 
the  mind  of  the  modern  reader  is  the  evidence  of  the 
enormous  political  power  of  the  Church  of  Rome, 
notwithstanding  the  adversity  which  had  overtaken 
the  Pope,  and  driven  him  to  take  refuge  for  many 
years  at  Avignon.  Ecclesiastics  of  the  stamp  of 


*  The  anniversary  of  the  battle  of  Bannockburn. 

\  An  heir  parcener  of  the  deceased  Earl  of  Buchan  in  right  of  his 
wife. 

x  The  lands  of  Henry  de  Balliol  in  Galloway  and  Angus  had  been 
bought  by  de  Percy. 

§  Per  rationabilem  extentam  (Foedera)  that  is,  according  to  a  new 
inquest  and  valuation  of  the  Crown  lands,  which  had  greatly  fallen  in 
value  during  the  war. 


326 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1327  A.D.- 


Anthony  Beck,  Bishop  of  Durham,  William  de  Lam- 
berton,  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews,  and  William  de  Mel¬ 
ton,  Archbishop  of  York,  took  the  field  as  readily 
and  as  fully  armed  as  any  layman ;  and  that  not  only 
in  defence  of  the  possessions  of  the  Chuich,  but  often 
as  generals  of  an  invading  army.  Yet  they  were  not 
to  be  held  subject  to  the  vicissitudes  of  war,  but  were 
to  receive  back  their  lands  on  the  restoration  of 
peace,  an  advantage  refused  to  legitimate  men  of  the 
sword.  Then  the  uneasiness  of  King  Robert  and  his 
people,  owing  to  the  repeated  exercise  against  him 
of  bell,  book  and  candle,  is  apparent  in  the  third 
article  of  this  treaty.  It  is  true  that  the  solemn 
curses  of  the  Church  had  proved  singularly  ineffective 
as  regards  the  temporal  affairs  of  Scotland.  The 
louder  and  deeper  the  execrations,  the  more  brightly 
fortune  had  smiled  on  the  Scottish  arms  ;  and  the 
greater  the  favour  shown  by  the  Pope  to  the  English 
cause,  the  more  hopelessly  it  became  rent  by  in¬ 
ternal  dissensions,  while  the  object  of  these  denuncia¬ 
tions  had  continued  to  receive  such  heart-whole 
service  from  his  barons  and  people  as  has  seldom 
been  the  lot  of  any  monarch.  Truly  it  seemed  as  if 
in  this  quarrel  the  Church  had  made  a  grievous 
blunder  and  chosen  the  wrong  side. 

Nevertheless  it  was  an  age  of  deep,  if  superstitious 
faith,  and  the  old  King  of  Scots  still,  perhaps,  thought 
of  that  far  off  day  when  the  altar-steps  of  Greyfriars 
church  had  dripped  with  the  life  blood  of  the  Red 
Comyn.  Sacrilege  and  murder  under  trust  had  left 
a  stain  which  it  would  take  all  the  favour  of  Mother 
Church  to  wash  out  of  the  record,  and,  notwith- 


1328  a.d.]  Campaign  of  Weardale. 


327 


standing  that  his  own  soul  had  already  received 
absolution  for  that  deed  from  Bishop  Wishart,  what 
evils  might  not  be  entailed  on  the  Scottish  people 
whom  he  loved,  and  on  his  son  in  whom  so  many 
hopes  had  their  centre,  unless  they  too  were  recon¬ 
ciled  with  the  spiritual  powers.  No,  the  Church  was 
still,  and  was  to  remain  for  two  centuries  more,  the 
strongest  political  force  in  Europe,  and  no  treaty 
could  be  satisfactory  unless  it  were  drawn  to  secure 
her  favour. 

Finally,  the  Papal  Court  was  duly  alive  to  its  own 
interest,  and,  forasmuch  as  instances  were  not  un¬ 
known  where  “  perpetual  peace  ”  had  been  swallowed 
up  in  war,  almost  before  the  ink  of  the  signatures 
had  dried,  it  was  common  prudence  to  insert  the 
tenth  and  last  article,  which  secured  a  solid  advantage 
to  God’s  Vicegerent  in  the  event  of  anything  going 
wrong. 

Notice  may  be  made  of  the  exceptions  to  the 
stipulations  that  the  subjects  of  either  King  should 
not  re-possess  the  lands  which  they  had  held  of  the 
other  King  before  the  war,  for  in  the  end  these  proved 
fatal  to  the  maintenance  of  peace.  These  exceptions 
were  all  made  in  favour  of  English  barons.  It  is 
true  that  a  year  later,  May  12,  1329,  Sir  James 
Douglas  received  back  his  ancient  possession  of 
Fawdon  in  Northumberland,  and  all  the  other  lands 
in  England  forfeited  by  his  father  William  de  Doug¬ 
las,  but  this  was  a  special  act  of  favour  (de  gratia 
nostra  speciali)  by  King  Edward.*  The  reason  for 
exempting  Percy,  Wake,  Beaumont  and  de  la  Touche 


*  Feeder  a. 


328 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


11328  A.D, 


from  the  loss  of  their  lands  in  Scotland,  is  said  by 
Sir  Thomas  Gray  to  have  been  that  these  lords 
would  not  agree  to  the  treaty  unless  this  were  done, 
“  de  quoy,”  says  he,  “  puis  enavoient  grant  mal.” 

Besides  the  above  articles  mentioned  by  Lord 
Hailes,  provision  was  made  for  returning  to  the 
Scots  the  celebrated  Ragman  Roll,  in  which  the 
Scots  landowners  had  done  fealty  to  Edward  I.  and 
the  bit  of  the  true  Cross  which  the  Scots  called  the 
Black  Rood.*  Lord  Hailes  inserts,  as  the  second 
article  in  the  treaty,  a  stipulation  for  the  return  to 
Scotland  of  the  Coronation  Stone,  founding  on  a 
writ  which  he  quotes,  issued  by  Edward  III.  on  July 
i,  1328,  to  the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  Westminster, 
directing  them  to  deliver  it  to  the  Sheriffs  of  Lon¬ 
don,  who  were  to  carry  it  to  the  Queen-Mother,  be¬ 
cause  his  council  had  agreed  at  the  Parliament  of 
Northampton  that  it  should  be  sent  to  Scotland.  It 
is,  however,  stated  distinctly  in  the  chronicle  of  Lan- 
ercost  that  the  people  of  London — Londinenses — 
would  on  no  account  agree  to  part  with  this  stone, 
and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  they  never  have  done  so. 

The  conditions  of  peace  were  submitted  to  King 
Robert’s  Parliament  assembled  in  Edinburgh  in 
March,  1328,  and  approved  by  them. 


*  Lanercost ,  261. 


The  Earls  of  Carrick. 


Sir  Alexander  de  Seton. 


CHAPTER  XV. 

DEATH  OF  THE  QUEEN  OF  SCOTS  AND  MARRIAGE 

OF  THE  PRINCE. 

A.D.  1328. 

ELIZABETH,  the  consort  and  second  wife  of 
King  Robert  of  Scotland,  did  not  live  to  wit¬ 
ness  the  fulfilment  of  her  husband’s  life-work, 
for  she  died  on  October  26,  1327.  Of  her  character 
and  appearance  no  memorial  has  been  preserved.  She 
was  the  second  daughter  of  Richard  de  Burgh  or 
Bourke,  Earl  of  Ulster,  the  most  powerful  of  the 
English  barons  in  Ireland,  and  married  Robert  de 
Brus  while  he  was  still  about  the  English  court. 
During  her  long  captivity  in  England,  from  the  bat¬ 
tle  of  Methven  in  1306,  till  after  that  of  Bannock¬ 
burn  in  1314,  she  was  treated  with  the  consideration 
due,  if  not  to  her  rank  as  countess,  which  she  lost  by 
the  forfeiture  by  her  husband  of  the  earldom  of 
Carrick,  at  least  to  that  of  an  earl’s  daughter. 

In  March  1314,  Edward  II.,  who  was  then  prepar¬ 
ing  for  his  great  campaign  in  Scotland,  ordered  the 

329 


330 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1328  A.D. 


removal  of  “  Elizabeth,  wife  of  Robert  de  Brus,” 
from  the  Abbey  of  Barking  to  Rochester  Castle, 
where  she  was  to  have  a  sufficient  chamber  and  20s. 
a  week  for  her  expenses.  She  was  to  be  allowed  to 
take  exercise  within  the  castle  and  the  Priory  of  St. 
Andrew,  at  suitable  times  and  under  a  sure  guard, 
and  provision  was  made  for  her  retinue  consisting  of 
three  Englishmen  and  an  English  woman.*  After 
his  great  defeat  she  was  brought  to  King  Edward  at 
York  on  July  18th  ;  thence,  on  October  2d,  she  was 
removed  with  her  sister-in-law  and  daughter  to  Car¬ 
lisle  for  exchange  with  English  prisoners,  f  where 
£&  was  paid  for  two  casks  of  wine  for  her  use. 

From  the  scanty  Scottish  Exchequer  Rolls  it  may 
be  gathered  that  at  Cardross  she  drove  in  an  open 
carriage  and  pair,  J  that  she  possessed  a  quantity  of 
silver  plate, §  and  that  the  last  recorded  act  of  her  life 
was  the  gift  of  an  ornament — qucedam  frontalis — to 
the  altar  of  St.  Mary  at  Dunfermline.  ||  The  details 
of  her  legacies  to  her  personal  attendants  are  not 
without  interest,  reflecting,  as  they  do,  light  upon 
the  manners  of  a  distant  day  and  a  simple  state  of 
society.  Elizabeth  de  Denton,  domicilla  (lady  in 
waiting),  received  £66,  13s.  4d.;  among  other  bene¬ 
ficiaries  were  the  Queen’s  two  grooms,  William  and 
Gilbert,  each  receiving  £1,  in  comp  lenient  urn,  as  did 
also  Esota,  the  washerwoman,  Alan  the  chandler, 
David  of  the  wardrobe,  and  others. 

The  Queen  of  Scots  died  at  Cullen,  where  the 


*  Bain,  iii.,  68.  f  Ibid.,  74.  \  Exchequer  Rolls,  i.  255. 

§  Ibid.,  212.  |  Ibid ,  i.,  239.  Ibid.,  217. 


DUNFERMLINE  ABBEY,  REFECTORY. 

( From  a  photograph  by  Vale?itine  Bros.,  Dundee .) 


1328  A. D.]  Death  of  the  Queen  of  Scots. 


33i 


King  founded  a  chaplainry  worth  £4  a  year  “  to  pray 
for  the  soule  of  Elizabeth  his  spouse,  quene  of 
Scottis,  quhilk  deceassit  in  our  said  burgh  of  Culane, 
and  her  bowallis  erdit*  in  oure  Lady  Kirk  thairof.” 
Of  her  children  mention  will  be  made  hereafter. 

The  national  mourning  for  the  Queen  was  merged 
in  the  brighter  occupation  of  preparing  for  the  wed¬ 
ding  of  her  son.  Peter  the  mechanic  ( Petrus 
machinarum ),  a  Flemish  trader  in  Berwick,  was  sent 
to  purchase  in  foreign  markets  certain  materials  which 
could  not  be  bought  at  home,  such  as  cloths,  furs, 
and  spices,  on  which  he  was  allowed  to  charge  a  com¬ 
mission  of  10  per  cent.  The  cloth  for  the  knights’ 
robes,  the  gift  of  the  King,  cost  £1 73,  gs.  2d.,  and 
for  the  esquires  and  valets,  £ 90 .  Hoods  and  capes 
of  vair,  miniver,  squirrel’s  and  other  fur,  and  of 
lambskin  were  also  provided.  For  the  household,  a 
great  store  of  linen  was  laid  in,  besides  4360  lbs.  of 
almonds,  600  lbs.  of  rice,  40  loaves  of  sugar,  180  lbs. 
of  pepper,  and  mace,  nutmegs,  saffron,  coarse  sugar 
in  barrels,  in  abundance.  Twenty  tuns  of  wine  cost 
£7 5  and,  strange  to  say,  2200  eels  in  barrels— prov¬ 
ender  which  would  be  very  unpalatable  to  modern 
Scots.  The  whole  bill  for  the  first  cargo  (for  Peter 
had  to  take  two  trips)  came  to  ,£941  >  os.  €>d.,  a  vast 
sum  in  those  days. 

Another  trader,  Thomas  de  Carnock  (?)  was  also 
sent  to  Flanders  to  buy  silks,  satins,  and  other  valu¬ 
ables,  at  a  cost  of  £4°°)  but  the  King,  by  a  letter 
under  his  own  hand,  exempted  his  accounts  from 
audit  because  he  was  so  well  assured  of  the  fidelity 


*  Earthed,  i.  e.,  buried. 


332 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1328  A.D. 


of  Thomas  as  an  agent ;  whereby  we  are  deprived 
of  a  knowledge  of  all  particulars,  except  that  a  gold 
seal  and  silver  gilt  chain  for  King  Robert,  and  a 
silver  seal  and  chain  for  the  bridegroom,  his  son,  cost 
together  £28,  16s.  * 

In  addition  to  all  this  heavy  expense,  the  house¬ 
hold  expenses  at  the  marriage  came  to  £9 66,  icxr.  10 d., 
besides  immense  quantities  of  oats  and  malt,  lam¬ 
preys,  sturgeons,  salt,  coals,  etc.,  1 7 1  oxen,  413  sheep, 
50  tuns  of  wine,  and  so  on.  It  was  a  great  occasion 
and  it  must  have  been  a  novel  pleasure  to  the  officials 
of  both  countries  to  spend  money  in  good  things, 
instead  of  perpetual  drain  for  engines  of  war  and 
payment  of  troops.  After  the  wedding  guests  had 
departed  from  Berwick,  Simon  of  Salton  stayed 
behind  to  look  after  the  fragments  which  remained. 
He  accounted  for  six  tuns  of  wine  and  a  great  weight 
of  provisions  and  live-stock  which  had  not  been  con¬ 
sumed.  The  pay  of  the  cooks  at  this  great  feast 
came  to  £25,  6s.  8d.,  but  the  minstrels  received  no 
less  than  £66,  15^.  40b. 

King  Robert’s  new  gold  seal  and  chain  were  not 
destined  to  grace  the  wedding.  His  growing  infirm¬ 
ity  kept  him  at  Cardross,  when  the  heir  apparent, 
now  created  Earl  of  Carrick,f  set  out  early  in  July 
to  meet  his  bride.  He  rode  with  a  numerous  train, 
halting  for  the  night  at  Lanark  and  Wedale,  and 
reaching  Berwick  on  the  third  day.  Thence,  before 

*  Exchequer  Rolls ,  cxvi. 

f  At  the  present  day  one  of  the  titles  of  the  Prince  of  Wales  is 
Earl  of  Carrick,  under  which  designation  his  toast  is  always  honoured 
in  Ayrshire. 


1328  a. D.]  Marriage  of  the  Prince,  33 3 

his  wedding,  he  paid  a  visit  to  Coldingham  Priory, 
apparently  with  a  very  large  party,  for  they  consumed 
six  bullocks — de  quibns  nemo  respondet — “  for  which 
nobody  answers.”  * 

The  boy  bridegroom  was  only  four  years  old, 
and  the  bride  but  six, — Princess  Johanna  of  the 
Tower,  as  she  was  called,  from  having  been  born 
in  that  place  of  gloomy  memories.  Moray  and 
Douglas  acted  for  the  absent  King  of  Scots  and 
received  the  Princess  from  the  hands  of  the  Queen 
Dowager  of  England  and  the  English  commissioners, 
for  King  Edward  was  not  present  in  person. 

It  must  have  been  a  strange  sight,  such  as  had 
scarcely  been  witnessed  since  the  days  when  the  first 
Edward  held  his  court  at  Berwick  to  adjudge  the 
claims  to  the  Scottish  crown,  to  see  the  people  of 
both  countries  merrymaking  together  beneath  the 
walls  of  that  grim  old  town,  for  the  possession  of 
which  they  had  often  fought  so  fiercely.  The 
knights,  too,  the  paladins  of  chivalry,  must  have 
been  glad  to  fraternise  ;  for,  after  all,  most  of  them 
were  of  a  common  race,  whose  nationality  had  been 
decided  by  the  accident  of  whether  their  most  valu¬ 
able  possessions  lay  to  the  north  or  south  of  the 
Border.  The  bonds  of  kinsmanship  or  marriage, 
which  had  been  so  sorely  strained  by  the  war,  were 
easily  resumed,  and  the  freemasonry  of  the  knightly 
code  was  as  powerful  in  peace  as  in  war. 

The  style  of  the  letters  passing  between  the  two 
courts  offers  a  curious  contrast  to  the  tone  which  had 
long  prevailed.  There  is  no  more  mention  of  the 


*  Exchequer  Rolls,  i.,  191. 


334 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1328  A.D 


rebel  Robert  de  Brus,  lately  Earl  of  Carrick,’’  but 
Edward  III.  addresses  himself  to  “the  magnificent 
Prince  Sir  Robert,  by  the  grace  of  God  King  of 
Scots,  his  dearest  friend,  greeting  and  embraces  of 
sincere  affection  ”  (August  9,  1328).* 

The  English  records  are  full  of  pardons  to  King 
Edward’s  subjects  for  adhering  to  the  Scots  in  the 
late  war,  and  of  instruments  reinstating  the  Scottish 
churchmen  and  religious  houses  in  their  former  pos¬ 
sessions  in  England.  It  is  true  that  in  official  docu¬ 
ments  not  intended  for  Scottish  inspection  terms 
were  still  used,  less  complimentary  to  the  royal  house 
of  Scotland  than  those  employed  in  correspondence. 
Thus,  on  December  18,  1328,  that  clerk  must  have 
enjoyed  a  privy  satisfaction  who  engrossed  a  deed 
confirming  Hugh  de  Templeton  in  certain  lands  in 
Ireland,  forfeited  by  William  de  Say  for  his  rebellion 
“  in  company  of  Robert  de  Bruys,  Edward  de  Bruys, 
and  other  Scottish  felons  in  Ireland. ”f 

But  outwardly  all  was  concord,  and  there  seemed 
every  prospect  of  profound  peace.  There  was, 
moreover,  a  gratifying  change  of  tone  in  the  papal 
letters  of  this  year,  when  Pope  John  XXII.,  still 
holding  his  court  at  Avignon,  resumed  correspond¬ 
ence  with  the  King  of  Scots.  There  is  no  more  any 
difficulty  in  according  Robert  his  royal  dignity. 
Plenary  absolution  from  excommunication  was 
promised  in  October,  1328,  in  answer  to  the  prayer 
of  King  Robert’s  envoys,  the  Bishops  of  St.  An¬ 
drews,  Moray,  and  Brechin,  and  Andrew  de  Moray, 


*  Bain,  iii.,  173. 
f  Ibid.,  175. 


A328  A.D.] 


Marriage  of  the  Prince. 


335 


doctor  of  Canon  Law.  The  only  penance  enjoined 
on  the  King  was  that  he  should  not  break  the  truce 
or  invade  England.  And  thus  closes  this  strange 
chapter  of  ecclesiastical  history  ;  the  culprit,  upon 
whom  had  been  poured  all  the  most  fearful  impreca¬ 
tions  of  Holy  Church,  having  regained  complete 
favour  by  obstinate  perseverance  in  the  very  course 
which  had  brought  him  into  such  deep  disgrace. 

During  this  year  1328,  which  witnessed  the  estab¬ 
lishment  of  Scottish  independence,  there  died  a  prel¬ 
ate,  William  de  Lamberton,  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews, 
from  whom,  perhaps  more  than  from  any  other  in¬ 
dividual,  Robert  de  Brus  had  received  encourage¬ 
ment  and  counsel  in  first  espousing  what  became  the 
national  cause. 

During  the  year  that  the  see  of  St.  Andrews  re¬ 
mained  vacant  after  de  Lamberton’s  death,  the 
revenues,  by  a  singular  arrangement,  were  assigned 
to  those  children,  the  Earl  and  Countess  of  Carrick, 
and  the  Exchequer  accounts  show  that  they  used 
the  episcopal  manor  of  Inchmorthach  as  a  residence. 
In  the  meantime,  the  ancestral  castle  of  the  Biuces 
at  Turnberry  was  being  got  ready  for  their  occupa¬ 
tion  * ;  additions  were  made  to  the  building,  and  a 
park  was  enclosed.  The  boy  Prince,  now  in  his 
sixth  year,  attended  the  Parliament  in  Edinburgh. 
Sir  David  de  Barclay  was  steward  of  his  household 
at  first,  and  afterwards  Sir  Alexander  de  Seton  ; 
besides  whom  there  were  a  clerk  of  audit,  a  clerk  of 

*  Exchequer  Rolls ,  i.,  259*  Nothing  now  remains  of  this  castle 
but  the  foundations.  Turnberry  lighthouse  stands  within  its  ancient 
enceinte. 


336 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1328  A. D. 


the  wardrobe,  a  treasurer,  Sir  Robert  Toynge,  nine 
ladies,  five  knights,  no  less  than  nine  chaplains  and 
clerics,  thirty-eight  esquires,  four  boys,  three  laun¬ 
dresses,  thirty-six  sergeants,  two  larderers,  twenty 
grooms,  and  a  page. 

It  had  been  stipulated  under  the  treaty  of  North¬ 
ampton  that  the  King  of  Scots  should  not  aid  the 
King  of  England’s  enemies  in  Ireland  ;  and  thus  it 
came  to  pass  that  King  Robert  was  able  to  resume 
friendly  relations  with  his  brother-in-law,  William 
Earl  of  Ulster,  son  of  the  Red  Earl,  against  whom 
Robert  and  Edward  de  Brus  had  waged  such  relent¬ 
less  war.  Among  other  tokens  of  amity,  the  King 
sent  the  earl  a  present  of  200  lbs  of  stockfish  from 
Cardross — an  acceptable  offering,  no  doubt,  in  the 
season  of  Lent.  * 

Although,  as  has  been  shown,  the  Pope  had  prom¬ 
ised  absolution  to  the  King  of  Scots,  and  his  people, 
and  had,  besides,  written  in  the  most  friendly  tone 
to  King  Robert  in  October,  1328,  requesting  him  to 
receive  with  favour  the  papal  chaplain,  James,  Arch¬ 
deacon  of  St.  Andrews,  and  James,  the  new  Bishop 
of  St.  Andrews,  yet  there  seems  to  have  been  un¬ 
satisfactory  delay  in  fulfilling  his  promise.  The 
Bishop  of  Brechin  was  at  Avignon  at  the  beginning 
of  1329,  on  a  mission  to  the  Papal  Court,  attended 
by  other  ambassadors,  and  carrying  the  significant 
provision  of  4000  marks  to  facilitate  negotiations — 
pro  negotiis  regni  ad  curiam  Romanam  expediendis.  f 


*  Exchequer  Rolls ,  i.,  199. 
f  Ibid. ,  21 1. 


Sir  Hugh  de  Mortimer,  John,  Earl  of  Warenne 

Earl  of  March.  and  Surry. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

DEATH  OF  ROBERT  DE  BRUS,  REVIEW  OF  HIS 
WORK  AND  CHARACTER. 

A.D.  1329. 

ROBERT  DE  BRUS  had  now  accomplished  his 
great  work,  and  there  was  nothing  in  his  age 
of  two  score  and  fourteen  years  to  forbid  the 
expectation  of  his  living  to  confirm  it  before  the 
kingdom  should  pass  to  his  son.  But  the  fates  de¬ 
creed  otherwise.  He  was  a  physical  wreck,  and  in 
the  spring  of  1329  Douglas,  who  was  constantly  in 
attendance  at  Cardross,  began  to  despair  of  his 
restoration  to  health. 

Not  that  the  King  was  wholly  bedridden  or  con¬ 
fined  to  the  house.  He  continued  to  move  about  his 
kingdom,  as  occasion  required,  till  within  a  few 
weeks  of  his  death.  He  paid  one  more  visit  to 
Galloway,  the  scene  of  so  many  of  his  early  adven¬ 
tures,  resting  at  Glenluce  on  March  29,  1329.* 
Thence  Douglas  travelled  with  him  to  Cardross,  and 
both  were  aware  that,  to  use  Froissart’s  words, 

*  The  Douglas  Book ,  i.,  172. 


22 


337 


33§ 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1329  A.D. 


“there  was  no  way  for  him  but  death.”  The  King 
spent  the  last  weeks  of  his  life  in  setting  in  order  his 
private  affairs  and  those  of  his  kingdom  and  subjects. 
On  May  nth  he  granted  a  protection  to  the  Abbey 
of  Melrose,  forbidding  all  men,  on  pain  of  forfeiture, 
to  injure  the  monks.  On  the  same  day  he  dictated 
what  is  known  as  his  death-bed  letter,  addressed  to 
Prince  David  Earl  of  Carrick,  and  his  successors  ; 
and  here  again  special  injunction  was'  made  for  the 
protection  of  Melrose  Abbey  and  the  completion  of 
the  new  church,  “  in  which,”  said  the  King,  “  I  have 
directed  that  my  heart  shall  be  buried.” 

Barbour  and  Froissart  both  give  a  narrative  of  the 
death-bed  scene,  and,  though  differing  in  some  de¬ 
tails,  these  two  authorities  agree  in  the  main.  Of 
the  two  one  naturally  inclines  to  credit  the  prose 
writer  with  greater  accuracy,  as  being  free  from  the 
exigencies  of  rhyme  and  metre.  The  chief  differ¬ 
ence  between  them  lies  in  the  account  of  how  Doug¬ 
las  came  to  be  charged  with  his  famous  mission. 
Barbour  says  that  the  King  having  sent  for  his  chief 
baron  to  his  death-bed  told  them  how,  remembering 
that  there  had  been  much  innocent  blood  shed  in 
his  cause,  he  had  resolved,  when  fortune  favoured 
him,  to  make  an  expedition  against  the  Saracens — 
the  foes  of  God.  But  seeing  that  his  strength  had 
failed — 

“  Sa  that  the  body  may  na  wis 
Fulfill  that  the  hart  can  devis,” 

now  desired  them  to  choose  one  of  their  number 
to  carry  his  heart  to  the  Holy  Land. 

“  Quhen  saul  and  cors  disseverit  ar. " 


1329  a.d.]  Death  of  Robert  de  Brus. 


339 


The  choice  of  the  barons  fell  with  one  consent  on 
“  the  douchty  Lord  Douglas.” 

Froissart,  however,  makes  the  King  himself  name 
“  the  gentle  knight  Sir  James  of  Douglas  ”  as  the  one 
to  carry  out  his  will ;  and,  little  as  one  may  rely  on 
the  letter  of  historical  speeches,  no  doubt  the  French 
historian  gives  pretty  accurately  the  sense  of  what 
the  dying  monarch  said.  There  were  so  many  ex¬ 
perienced  witnesses  present  that  the  substance  must 
have  been  accurately  reported. 


“  Then,”  says  Froissart,  “  calling  to  his  side  the  gentle  knight  Sir 
James  of  Douglas,  he  thus  addressed  him  before  all  the  lords  : 

“  ‘  Sir  James,  my  dear  friend,  you  know  well  that  I  have  had  much 
ado  in  my  days  to  uphold  and  sustain  the  right  of  this  realm,  and, 
when  I  had  most  difficulty,  I  made  a  solemn  vow,  which  as  yet  I 
have  not  accomplished,  for  which  I  am  right  sorry.  That  vow  was, 
that  if  it  was  granted  to  me  to  achieve  and  make  an  end  of  all  my 
wars,  and  so  bring  this  realm  to  peace,  I  would  go  forth  and  war  with 
the  enemies  of  Christ,  the  adversaries  of  our  holy  Christian  faith.  To 
this  purpose  my  heart  has  ever  intended.  But  our  Lord  would  not 
consent  thereto  :  for  I  have  had  so  much  to  do  in  my  life,  and  now, 
in  my  last  enterprise,  I  have  been  smitten  with  such  sickness  that  I 
cannot  escape.  Seeing,  therefore,  that  my  body  cannot  go  to  achieve 
what  my  heart  desires,  I  will  send  my  heart  instead  of  my  body,  to 
accomplish  my  vow.  And  because  I  know  not  in  all  my  realm  a 
knight  more  valiant  than  you,  or  better  able  to  accomplish  my  vow 
in  my  stead,  therefore  I  require  you,  my  own  dear  special  friend,  for 
your  love  to  me,  and  to  acquit  my  soul  against  my  Lord  God,  that 
you  undertake  this  journey.  I  confide  so  thoroughly  in  your  noble¬ 
ness  and  truth,  that  I  doubt  not  what  you  take  in  hand  you  will 
achieve  :  and  if  my  desires  be  carried  out  as  I  shall  explain  to  you, 
I  shall  depart  in  peace  and  quiet. 

“  ‘  I  wish  as  soon  as  I  be  dead  that  my  heart  be  taken  out  of  my 
body  and  embalmed,  and  that,  taking  as  much  of  my  treasure  as  you 
think  necessary  for  yourself  and  the  company  suitable  to  your  rank 
which  shall  go  with  you  on  the  enterprise,  you  convey  my  heart  to 


340 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1329  A.D. 


the  holy  sepulchre  where  our  Lord  lay,  and  present  it  there,  seeing 
my  body  cannot  go  thither.  And  wherever  you  come,  let  it  be  known 
that  you  carry  with  you  the  heart  of  King  Robert  of  Scotland,  at  his 
own  instance  and  desire,  to  be  presented  at  the  holy  sepulchre.’  ” 

Sir  James  at  once  pledged  himself  to  the  task,  by 
the  faith  he  owed  to  God  and  to  the  order  of  true 
knighthood.  “Then  I  thank  you,”  said  the  King, 
“  for  now  I  shall  die  in  greater  ease  of  mind,  seeing 
I  know  that  the  most  worthy  and  sufficient  knight 
in  my  realm  shall  achieve  for  me  that  which  I  could 
not  myself  perform.” 

King  Robert  expired  on  June  7,  1329,  aged  fifty- 
four  years  and  eleven  months. 

His  heart  was  taken  from  his  body,  embalmed, 
placed  in  a  silver  casket,  and  given  in  charge  of  the 
Lord  of  Douglas.  This  was  a  breach  of  the  rules  of 
the  Church,  for  in  1299,  Pope  Boniface  VIII.  had 
issued  the  Bull  Detest ando  feritatis  abusum ,  forbid¬ 
ding  the  mutilation  of  the  dead,  even  from  pious 
motives,  decreeing  to  excommunication  those  who 
should  do  such  things,  and  prohibiting  ecclesiastical 
burial  to  any  corpse  so  treated.  But,  as  it  is  doubt¬ 
ful  whether  Douglas  and  all  others  concerned  in  this 
transaction  had  ever  been  formally  absolved  from 
the  excommunication  under  which  they  had  lain  for 
so  many  years,  probably  it  did  not  disquiet  them 
unduly  that  they  should  incur  fresh  disgrace.  Never¬ 
theless,  two  years  later,  in  August,  1331,  Pope  John, 
on  the  instance  of  the  Earl  of  Moray,  granted  abso¬ 
lution  to  all  who  had  taken  part  “  in  the  inhuman 
and  cruel  treatment  ”  of  the  body  of  King  Robert. 

The  body  itself  was  embalmed  and  taken  to  Dun- 


1329  A.D.l 


Death  of  Robert  de  Brus. 


34i 


fermline,  where  that  of  the  Queen  had  gone  before. 
Through  the  dry  records  of  the  chamberlain’s  ac¬ 
counts  the  sorrowful  procession  may  be  traced, 
winding  its  way  past  the  foot  of  Loch  Lomond  to 
Dunipace,  thence  to  Cambuskenneth,  and  so  to  the 
last  resting  place  of  the  King  of  Scots.  It  seems 
that  the  King  had,  about  a  year  before  his  death, 
ordered  a  marble  monument  to  be  made  in  Paris. 
The  sum  of  £12,  10 s.  was  paid  for  its  carriage,  through 
Bruges  and  England  to  Dunfermline,  and  the  mason 
who  set  it  up  over  the  tomb  received  £38,  25.  An 
iron  railing  was  put  round  the  monument  at  a  cost 
of  £21,  8^.  2d.  in  addition  to  the  gift  of  a  robe  worth 
205.  to  Robert  of  Lessuden,  charged  with  the  work. 
John  of  Linlithgow  was  commissioned  to  paint  the 
iron  work,  and  1100  books  of  gold  leaf,  bought  at 
York,  were  used  in  its  decoration.  A  temporal y 
chapel  of  Baltic  timber  was  set  up  ovei  the  giave 
on  the  day  of  the  funeral,  and  large  sums  weie  dis¬ 
bursed  in  vestments  for  the  ecclesiastics  and  mourn¬ 
ing  for  the  Court.  It  may  seem  rather  trivial  to 
dwell  on  these  details,  but,  in  the  absence  of  infor¬ 
mation  of  greater  moment,  every  circumstance 
which  reveals  the  means  taken  by  the  Scottish  peo¬ 
ple  to  do  honourable  obsequies  to  their  depaited 
hero,  acquires  an  interest  which  it  would  not  other¬ 
wise  possess. 

It  might  have  been  expected  that  the  Scottish 
nation,  which  owes  its  very  existence  to  the  stiong 
will  and  ready  arm  of  Robert  the  Bruce,  would 
have  guarded  his  tomb  with  sleepless  vigilance,  so 
long  as  marble  and  mortar  would  cling  together 


342 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1329  A,D. 


and  that  in  all  the  coming  virulence  of  faction  and 
bitterness  of  ecclesiastical  strife,  this  spot  of  ground 
would  never  have  been  violated — this  memorial  of 
the  Great  King  would  have  been  proudly  preserved. 

Even  had  there  been  found  a  Scotsman  so  alien 
from  the  spirit  of  his  race  as  to  hold  the  memory  of 
Robert  the  Bruce  as  a  common  thing,  unworthy  of 
honour,  surely  there  were  noble  ashes  enough  besides 
in  that  abbey  ground  to  make  it  forever  sacred.  For, 
so  soon  as  the  different  peoples  inhabiting  Scotland 
had  united  to  form  one  nation  under  one  monarch, 
Dunfermline  succeeded  Iona  as  the  sepulchre  of  the 
Scottish  kings.  Here  were  laid  Malcolm  Canmore, 
his  Queen  Margaret,  and  their  sons  Edward,  Edmund, 
and  Ethelbert ;  Alexander  I.  and  Queen  Sibylla  ; 
David  I.  and  his  two  consorts  ;  Alexander  III.,  his 
Queen  Margaret,  and  their  sons  David  and  Alex¬ 
ander.  Hither  also,  in  the  days  that  followed  the 
reign  of  Robert  the  Bruce,  had  been  carried  almost 
all  that  Scotland  had  to  cherish  of  wise  and  great 
and  good  among  her  rulers:  surely  her  sons  would 
hold  the  place  sacred  for  all  time. 

Not  so. 

On  March  28,  1560,  the  choir,  transepts,  and 
belfry,  as  well  as  the  monastery  of  Dunfermline, 
were  razed  by  the  Reformers,  and  the  nave  was 
refitted  four  years  later  to  serve  as  a  parish  church. 
Ruin — ruthless,  senseless  ruin — fell  upon  the  monu¬ 
ment  of  Scotland’s  greatest  ruler,  just  as  at  that 
time  it  fell  upon  countless  other  relics  of  irrepara¬ 
ble  value.  So  that  it  came  to  pass  when,  in  1821 
foundations  were  being  cleared  for  a  new  church, 


DUNFERMLINE  ABBEY  FROM  THE  NORTH-EAST. 

{From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros.,  Dundee., ) 


1329  A.D.] 


Death  of  Robert  de  Brus. 


343 


no  man  could  point  with  certainty  to  the  place 
where  Robert  the  Bruce  had  been  laid.  A  grave 
was  found,  it  is  true,  near  where  the  high  altar  of 
the  abbey  church  once  stood,  and  in  the  grave  the 
bones  of  a  man,  one  of  which,  the  breast  bone,  had 
been  sawn  asunder,  as  one  should  do  who  had  to 
remove  the  heart  of  a  man.  fragments  of  fine 
linen,  with  a  gold  thread  running  through  it,  lay 
round  the  remains,  and  all  about  lay  shattered 
morsels  of  black  and  white  marble,  carved  and 
gilt,  probably  the  remains  of  the  Paiis  sculptors 
handiwork.  A  skull  lay  with  the  othei  bones,  but 
who  can  say  for  certain  that  it  was  the  same  that 
the  great  Plautagenet  had  desired  so  eagerly  to 
see  fixed  to  London  Bridge,  a  desire,  which,  had 
he  lived  a  few  years  longer,  it  is  only  too  likely 
would  have  been  gratified.  All  that  can  be  said  is 
that  it  is  possible  and  not  improbable  that  these 
remains  are  those  of  Scotland  s  greatest  king. 

But  if  his  people  have  suffered  the  Bruce’s  mortal 
parts  to  be  lost,  how  dearly  they  keep  his  memory. 
So  dearly,  that  there  is  no  exploit  so  heroic,  hardly 
any  miracle  so  incredible,  as  not  to  have  attached 
itself  to  his  story  ;  so  that  the  chief  difficulty  .  in 
writing  it  has  not  been  found  so  much  in  collecting 
facts,  as  in  refusing  credence  to  fictions  which  have 

gathered  round  his  name. 

There  is  much  that  even  the  most  devoted  Scots¬ 
man  could  wish  to  see  wiped  out  from  the  earlier 
pages  of  the  record.  His  Norman  lineage,  his  hered¬ 
itary  homage  to  the  English  King,  disgust  with 
the  feeble  administration  of  John  of  Balliol,  might 


344 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1329  A.D. 


palliate — they  might  even  go  far  to  excuse— Bruce’s 
indifference  to  Wallace’s  enterprise.  It  might  be 
pardoned  to  him  that,  having  once  embarked  in 
treasonable  designs  against  his  King,  he  repented 
and  renewed  his  oath  of  fealty.  Less  can  be  said  in 
defence  of  the  sorry  surrender  of  Irvine,  when,  at  the 
first  glitter  of  English  spears,  the  confederacy  fell 
asunder,  and  Wallace  was  left  to  go  forward  alone. 
But  even  here  there  may — there  must — have  been 
circumstances  beyond  our  understanding.  Between 
de  Brus,  the  Norman  knight,  and  Wallace,  the  out¬ 
lawed  Scottish  brigand,  there  need  have  been  little 
harmony  of  habit  and  feeling— so  little  as  to  make 
co-operation  between  them  impracticable.  De  Brus 
may  have  realised  that  to  persevere  at  that  time 
without  hearty  alliance  with  William  Douglas  and 
the  other  barons  who  had  joined  him,  would  have 
been  simply  to  march  the  shortest  way  to  the 
scaffold.  Therefore  even  in  the  capitulation  of  Irvine 
he  may  be  leniently  judged. 

But  the  darkest  part  was  to  come. 

Renewing  his  fealty  to  Edward  and  ratifying  it 
by  the  most  solemn  adjurations  known  to  a  Christian, 
what  can  be  said  in  defence  of  Bruce’s  repeated  pres¬ 
ence  in  Edward’s  Parliament  and  Council,  about  the 
time  when  Wallace  was  hurried  to  death  ?  He  was 
an  English  subject,  it  is  true,  and,  as  such,  bound  to 
regard  Wallace,  his  former  comrade,  as  a  rebel,  and 
to  serve  King  Edward  faithfully  in  all  things.  But 
if  that  is  held  to  justify  his  indifference  to  Wallace’s 
fate  he  was  involved  in  the  greater  dishonour  by 
the  secret  treaty  then  existing  between  him  and 


DUNFERMLINE  ABBEY,  NAVE  LOOKING  EAST. 

C From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros.,  Dundee. 


1329  a.d.]  Death  of  Robert  de  Brus. 


345 


William  de  Lamberton.  Of  treachery  to  King,  to 
comrade,  or  to  both,  Robert  de  Brus  can  scarcely 
be  acquitted. 

Of  the  more  violent  crime  in  Greyfriars  Church 
there  is  less  occasion  to  speak.  It  was  a  brutal, 
bloody  murder,  aggravated,  as  there  is  too  much 
reason  to  suspect,  by  its  being  committed  under 
trust.  The  blackest  part  of  it,  according  to  the 
creed  of  that  time,  was  that  it  was  committed  in  a 
church,  thereby  making  the  murderer  guilty  of  sacri¬ 
lege.  In  the  middle  ages  that  was  considered  the 
central  feature  in  the  tragedy  :  to  modern  minds  it 
appears  a  comparatively  trifling  detail.  We  have 
come  to  look  on  murder  as  equally  heinous  whether 
it  be  committed  in  the  green-wood,  in  the  streets, 
or  in  a  place  of  worship.  Men’s  judgment  on  the 
assassination  of  John  Comyn  is  the  same  now, 
though  on  different  grounds,  as  was  King  Edward’s 
nearly  six  hundred  years  ago — namely,  that  a  worse 
deed  could  not  have  been  done. 

But  whatever  may  have  been  his  guilt  or  short¬ 
coming  as  a  man — as  a  King,  Bruce  never  gave  his 
subjects  cause  to  blush  for  him.  From  the  moment 
the  Countess  of  Fife  placed  the  golden  diadem  on 
his  brow  at  Scone,  he  followed  a  single  purpose  with 
unwavering  courage  and  extraordinary  sagacity. 

By  personal  charm  of  manner  and  address  and  by 
a  remarkable  power  of  sympathy  with  men  of  every 
degree,  he  attached  those  around  him  and  secured 
their  devotion.  Perhaps  the  most  direct  evidence 
of  this  is  to  be  found  in  his  influence  over  his  nephew, 
young  Thomas  Randolph,  who  was  taken  prisoner  by 


346  Robert  the  Bruce.  [1329  A.D. 

Douglas  on  Lyne  Water.  Violently  opposed  as  was 
Randolph  to  the  Scottish  cause,  rudely  as  he  spoke 
to  his  uncle  when  brought  before  him,  he  soon  be¬ 
came  the  rival  of  Douglas  in  affection  for  the  King, 
as  he  remained  to  the  last  his  rival  in  knightly  service. 
To  this  personal  influence  of  the  King  must  be  at¬ 
tributed  in  great  measure,  not  only  the  fidelity  with 
which  he  was  served,  for  although  many  English 
knights  came  over  to  his  side,  there  is  not  a  single 
authentic  instance  of  one  deserting  him  in  favour  of 
King  Edward. 

During  the  long  warfare  he  waged,  from  1306  to 
1327,  very  few  chroniclers  attempt  to  fix  the  charge 
of  cruelty  upon  King  Robert.  It  has  been  shown 
above  that,  judged  according  to  the  custom  of  war 
and  the  civil  code  prevailing  in  the  13th  and  14th 
centuries,  Edward  I.  was  far  from  deserving  the 
outrageous  character  given  him  by  certain  Scottish 
historians.  A  similar  dispassionate  view  will  reveal 
Robert  de  Brus  as  not  only  negatively,  but  actively, 
humane.  In  all  his  many  raids  in  England,  it  is  testi¬ 
fied,  by  English  writers  of  the  time,  that  he  never 
permitted  people  to  be  slain,  except  when  they  stood 
on  their  defence.  To  prisoners  of  war  he  was  always 
indulgent,  and  sometimes  very  generous,  as  in  the 
case  of  Sir  Marmaduke  de  Twenge,  on  the  morrow 
of  Bannockburn.  The  nature  of  the  warfare  King 
Robert  had  to  wage  was  inevitably  cruel.  The  re¬ 
peated  raids  on  English  soil,  the  destruction  of  build¬ 
ings  and  growing  crops  and  the  ruin  of  private  own¬ 
ers,  were  the  only  means  at  his  hand  of  enforcing  his 
will  against  a  foe  far  more  powerful  than  himself. 


1329  A. D.]  Death  of  Robert  de  Brus . 


347 


The  least  fascinating  page  of  his  warfare  was  the 
melancholy  expedition  to  Ireland. 

Lastly,  he  was  always  exceedingly  anxious  to  be 
at  peace  with  England,  though  inflexible  in  the  terms 
on  which  alone  he  would  consent  to  it. 

As  a  civil  ruler  Robert  I.  had  scant  time  to  develop 
a  policy,  but  enough  remains  to  show  that,  had  he 
been  longer  spared  to  his  country,  he  would  have 
displayed  the  same  energy  in  the  affairs  of  peace, 
which  had  been  so  conspicuous  in  warfare. 

During  the  reign  of  David  I.  and  Alexander  III. 
the  burghs  of  Scotland  had  attained  a  considerable 
degree  of  wealth  and  importance.  Though  not  re¬ 
presented  in  Parliament  until  the  Cambuskenneth 
session  of  1326,  there  never  had  arisen  between 
them  and  the  feudal  owners  of  the  soil  any  of  that 
jealousy  and  discord  which  is  such  a  marked  feature 
in  the  early  history  of  some  other  countries.  The 
code  of  chivalry  was  as  scrupulously  observed  and 
honoured  among  the  Scottish  barons  as  in  any  other 
European  court,  but  it  never  prevailed  to  set  up  a 
cold  barrier  of  caste  between  the  seigneury  and  the 
burgesses.  The  cadets  of  noble  and  knightly  fami¬ 
lies  were  not  held  to  forfeit  their  rank  if  they  engaged 
in  trade,  and  successful  merchants  sometimes  became 
the  founders  of  noble  families.  There  is  good  rea¬ 
son  to  suppose  that  even  the  gentle  knight,  Sir  James 
of  Douglas,  was  descended  from  a  wealthy  Flemish 
merchant,  Freskin,  to  whom  David  I.  granted  exten¬ 
sive  lands  in  the  conquered  province  of  Moray; 
though  it  suited  Hume  of  Godscroft,  writing  in  the 
17th  century,  to  please  his  powerful  patron,  the 


348 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1329  A.D. 


Earl  of  Angus,  by  declaring  that  the  House  of  Doug¬ 
las  was  of  such  antiquity  that  its  origin  was  incapa¬ 
ble  of  “  an  exact  and  infallible  demonstration,”  and 
to  proceed  to  deduce  it  from  a  great  warrior  under 
an  apocryphal  King  Solvathius  in  the  8th  century. 
Sir  James  Douglas  himself,  if  he  ever  bothered  him¬ 
self  about  a  remote  pedigree,  would  probably  have 
been  the  first  to  laugh  at  such  a  legend.  The  origi¬ 
nal  nationality  of  the  powerful  family  of  Flemings, 
Earls  of  Wigtown,  is  evident  in  their  surname. 

The  relations  between  the  feudal  and  burghal 
magnates  in  Scotland  during  the  12th,  13th,  and  14th 
centuries  have  been  aptly  compared  to  those  prevail¬ 
ing  in  the  republics  of  Genoa  and  Venice.  This 
spirit  King  Robert  fostered  by  his  care  for  the 
townspeople. 

Unluckily,  at  the  time  when  peaceful  relations  be¬ 
tween  England  and  Scotland  came  to  an  end  in  the 
reign  of  John  Balliol,  Berwick,  the  wealthiest  and  busi¬ 
est  town  in  the  northern  kingdom,  was  precisely  the 
one  most  exposed  to  injury  from  the  southern.  The 
chronicler  of  Lanercost,  writing  from  the  comparative 
seclusion  at  Carlisle,  describes  it  as  so  populous  and  in¬ 
dustrious  ( negotiosa )  as  to  deserve  the  title  of  a  second 
Alexandria  “whose  wealth  was  the  sea,  and  the 
waves  the  walls  thereof.”  *  Some  idea  of  the  extent 
of  the  trade  of  Berwick  may  be  gathered  from  the  fact 
that,  at  a  time  when  the  whole  customs  of  England 
amounted  to  no  more  than  ^8411,  igs.  w\d.,  those 
of  Berwick  were  accepted  by  a  Gascon  merchant  in 


*  Lanercost,  185. 


CAMBUSKENNETH  ABBEY. 

C From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros.,  Dundee .) 


1329  A.D.] 


Death  of  Robert  de  Brus. 


349 


security  for  a  debt  of  ^2197,  8 s,  due  by  Alexander 
III.  for  corn  and  wine.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  the 
debt  had  not  been  liquidated  when  that  king  died. 
Upon  Berwick  fell  the  most  grievous  affliction  of  the 
War  of  Independence,  for  the  first  act  of  that  war 
was  its  sack  by  Edward  I.  when  the  inhabitants  were 
slaughtered  and  the  streets  ran  with  blood  for  two 
days.  No  similar  instance  of  severity  happened  to 
any  other  city. 

The  Scottish  burghs  derived  great  benefit  from  the 
wise  policy  of  the  Scottish  kings,  who,  when  Henry 
II.  drove  all  foreigners  out  of  England,  encouraged 
these  industrious  traders  and  mechanics,  especially 
the  Flemings,  to  settle  in  their  dominions. 

It  is  owing  to  a  change  in  the  relations  of  royal 
burghs  to  the  Crown  which,  if  not  introduced  by 
King  Robert,  received  his  sanction  and  was  made 
universal,  that  we  are  able  to  compare  the  relative 
size  and  importance  of  the  towns  as  they  stood  after 
the  cloud  of  war  had  rolled  away  for  a  time.  Under 
the  old  system,  such  burgher  paid  a  fixed  yeaily  rent 
to  the  Crown  in  respect  of  his  separate  toft  or  tene¬ 
ment,  and  these  rents  were  periodically  collected  and 
accounted  for  by  Government  officials,  togethei  with 
the  fines  imposed  in  the  municipal  courts  and  the 
parva  costuma  or  town  duties,  all  of  which  formed 
part  of  the  royal  revenue.  Under  the  new  system, 
each  municipality  received  from  the  chamberlain  a 
lease  for  a  fixed  term  of  years  of  its  rents,  fines,  and 
customs,  paying  a  rent  adjusted  so  as  to  leave  an  in¬ 
come  sufficient  to  meet  the  expenses  of  local  self- 
government.  Sometimes  a  feudal  loid  intet posed 


350 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1329  A.D. 


between  the  Crown  and  the  town,  and  farmed  the 
rents.* 

One  remarkable  feature  in  the  fiscal  policy  of 
King  Robert’s  government,  inherited  from  his  pre¬ 
decessors  on  the  throne,  differed  from  that  of  foreign 
countries  and  may  be  held  to  be  the  earliest  authen¬ 
tic  example  of  the  practice  of  free  trade.  No 
duty  was  permitted  to  be  levied  on  imported 
goods,  except  of  course  the  parva  costuma  levied 
by  each  burgh  on  all  produce,  whether  foreign  or 
native,  coming  within  its  boundary.  This  was  a 
trifling  matter ;  but  the  national  policy  of  free  trade 
continued  in  force  until  the  reign  of  James  VI., 
when  an  Act  was  passed  in  1597,  imposing  a  duty  on 
cloth  and  other  merchandise.  The  object  of  this 
new  departure  was  not,  as  might  be  supposed,  the 


*  The  fixed  rents  paid  by  the  several  royal  burghs  in  1327,  when 
peace  was  concluded  with  England,  are  shown  in  the  following  table, 
in  which  in  spite  of  her  many  adversities,  Berwick  still  holds  the 


first  place  : 

£. 

s. 

d. 

£• 

s. 

d. 

Berwick, 

266 

13 

4 

Roxburgh, 

20 

Aberdeen, 

213 

6 

8 

Cullen, 

20 

Perth, 

160 

Forfar, 

18 

13 

4 

Inverness, 

46 

Dumfries, 

18 

13 

4 

Stirling, 

36 

Wigtown, 

18 

13 

4 

Edinburgh, 

34 

18 

8 

Inverkeithing, 

15 

Ayr, 

30 

Montrose, 

13 

2 

Rutherglen, 

30 

Lanark, 

12 

Haddington, 

29 

6 

8 

Kintore, 

12 

Peebles, 

23 

6 

8 

Linlithgow, 

10 

Crail, 

22 

9 

4 

Kirkcudbright, 

9 

Dundee, 

22 

Tyvie, 

6 

3 

4 

Dunbarton, 

22 

Mill  of  Mouskis, 

2 

Banff, 

21 

6 

8 

1329  asd.]  Death  of  Robert  de  Brus . 


35i 


patriotic  one  of  protecting  home  industries,  but,  as 
is  set  forth  in  the  preamble,  the  far  less  worthy  one 
of  enabling  King  James,  as  the  “  free  prince  of  a 
soverane  power,”  to  acquire  the  means  “  for  the  en- 
terteyning  of  his  princely  port.”  Allusion  is  made 
in  the  same  preamble  to  the  immemorial  exemption 
from  duty  of  all  imports  into  Scotland,  which  is 
shown  to  be  contrary  to  the  practice  of  all  other  na¬ 
tions.  The  Convention  of  Royal  Burghs  remon¬ 
strated  strongly  against  this  measure,  which,  they 
declared,  imposed  “  ane  new  and  intollerabill  cus- 
tome.” 

Less  intelligible  than  this  free  trade  policy  was 
that  under  which,  under  Robert  I.,  a  duty  was  ex¬ 
acted  on  the  exportation  of  wool  and  hides.  The 
tax  on  wool  so  exported  was  half  a  mark  (6s.  Sd.)  a 
sack ;  on  wool  felts  3s.  4 d.  a  hundred,  and  on  hides 
one  mark  (13^.  4 d.)  on  the  last. 

An  Act  of  great  importance  to  Galloway,  a  district 
where  disaffection  to  Bruce  lingered  more  obstinately 
than  in  any  other  part  of  his  realm,  was  passed  at 
Glasgow  on  June  13,  1324.  It  was  thereby  enacted 
that  every  Galloway  man  charged  with  an  offence 
should  be  entitled  to  choose  good  and  faithful  trial 
by  jury,  instead  of  being  bound  to  the  old  code  of 
trial  by  battle.  Notwithstanding  this,  as  late  as 
1385,  Archibald  Douglas,  Lord  of  Galloway,  protested 
for  the  liberty  of  the  old  laws  of  Galloway  at  all 
points. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  Scottish  coinage,  before 
the  union  of  the  two  countries,  had  been  debased 
out  of  all  proportion  to  that  of  England,  so  that  in 


352 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1329  A.D. 


the  17th  century  the  value  of  Scottish  currency 
was  as  one  to  twelve,  compared  with  English. 
There  is  an  idea  current  that  this  originated  in  the 
reign  of  Robert  I.,  but  this  is  so  far  from  being  the 
case  that,  until  the  year  1355,  Scots  money  was  of 
equal  value  with  English. 

It  is  true  that  in  the  long  strain  on  the  national 
resources  which  began  with  the  War  of  Independ¬ 
ence  and  continued  until  the  Union  in  1707,  may 
be  traced  the  necessity  which  drove  the  Scottish 
kings,  following  the  example  of  their  allies,  the  kings 
of  France,  to  lower  the  standard  of  the  currency 
until  one  shilling  Scots  was  worth  no  more  than  one 
penny  English  or  sterling.  But  in  this  vicious 
policy  King  Robert  and  his  ministers  had  no  hand. 

Art  has  lent  no  aid  to  the  imagination  in  its 
attempt  to  realise  the  outward  appearance  of  Robert 
de  Brus,  his  companions  in  arms  or  his  enemies,  for 
the  rude  profiles  on  his  coins  can  hardly  be  regarded 
as  serious  portraits.  Neither  statues  nor  pictures  have 
preserved  their  lineaments.  John  Mair  may  have 
been  repeating  authentic  tradition  in  the  following 
brief  passage  in  his  Historia  Major  is  Britannice : 

“  His  figure  was  graceful  and  athletic,  with  broad  shoulders  ;  his 
features  were  handsome  ;  he  had  the  yellow  hair  of  the  northern  race, 
with  blue  and  sparkling  eyes.  His  intellect  was  quick,  and  he  had 
the  gift  of  fluent  speech  in  the  vernacular,  delightful  to  listen  to.” 

Supposing  the  remains  exhumed  at  Dunfermline  to 
have  been  King  Robert’s,  which  is  very  far  from 
improbable,  he  must  have  stood  about  six  feet  high. 
In  days  when  deeds  of  arms  formed  as  much  of  the 
everyday  life  of  gentlemen  as  politics  do  of  their 


1329  a.d.]  Death  of  Robert  de  Brus. 


353 


modern  counterparts,  the  union  of  a  powerful  body 
with  a  strong  intellect  was  sure  to  bring  a  man  to 
distinction,  provided  he  escaped  violent  death  on  the 
field  or  the  scaffold.  Hence  the  prominence  of  men 
like  Moray  and  Douglas,  for  before  the  invention  of 
gunpowder,  all  combats  were  hand  to  hand.  Brains 
were  useful,  no  doubt,  but  they  commanded  little 
respect  unless  their  owner  could  enforce  his  opinion 
by  personal  prowess.  Perhaps  no  act  of  King 
Robert’s  life  contributed  so  much  to  his  ultimate 
success  as  the  overthrow  of  Sir  Henry  de  Bohun 
on  the  day  before  the  battle  of  Bannockburn. 

Robert  de  Brus  won  for  himself  high  rank  among 
famous  military  commanders.  It  was  owing,  no 
doubt,  to  want  of  funds  and  resources  that  he  came 
to  rely  on  infantry  armed  with  pikes  and  on  light 
Border  cavalry  in  encounters  with  the  heavily 
equipped  men-at-arms  and  famous  archers  of  the 
English  armies.  But  his  repeated  success  against 
these,  hitherto  regarded  as  indispensable  in  feudal 
warfare,  brought  about  a  notable  reform  in  tactics. 
It  is  true  that  Bruce  was  not  the  first  to  discover 
what  foot-soldiers  could  accomplish  against  heavy 
cavalry,  for,  as  Sir  Thomas  Gray  reminds  us,  the 
example  had  been  set  by  the  Netherlanders  at 
Courtray,  when  they  overthrew  on  foot  the  splendid 
chivalry  of  France.  Moreover,  trained  as  he  had 
been  in  the  knightly  school  of  war,  Bruce  was  ever 
reluctant  to  risk  a  pitched  battle  against  fully 
equipped  and  mounted  troops,  until  the  lesson  of 
Bannockburn  showed  him  what  mighty  results  might 
be  achieved  by  good  infantry  in  the  hands  of  a 


*3 


354 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1329  A.D. 


master.  Eye  witness  of  the  defeat  of  the  squadrons 
of  de  Clifford  and  de  Beaumont  by  the  “  schiltrome  ” 
of  Randolph,  Bruce  was  able  to  enact  the  same 
miracle  on  a  far  larger  scale  on  the  following  day. 
The  campaign  of  1314  conferred  on  infantry  an  im¬ 
portance  which  the  subsequent  invention  of  gun¬ 
powder  came  to  confirm. 

King  Robert  left  five  lawful  children.  By  his  first 
wife,  Isabel,  daughter  of  Donald,  Earl  of  Mar,  he  had 
one  daughter,  the  Princess  Marjorie,  who  married 
Walter  the  Steward,  and  died  in  her  first-child-bed. 

By  his  second  wife,  Elizabeth  de  Burgh,  who  be¬ 
came  Queen  of  Scotland  on  her  husband’s  corona¬ 
tion  in  1306,  he  had  two  daughters,  Matilda  and 
Margaret,  born  after  1316,  and  one  son,  David,  born 
March  5,  1324.  Subsequently  a  younger  son,  John, 
was  born,  but  he  died  in  infancy  and  was  buried  at 
Restennet.* 

Princess  Matilda  married  an  esquire  called  Thomas 
Isaac,  whom  subsequent  Scottish  writers  have  at¬ 
tempted  to  dignify  by  calling  him  deYsack.  But  in 
fact  the  alliance  was  not  a  brilliant  one,  though  it 
may  have  been  a  romantic  love  affair.  Fordun 
refers  to  the  husband  as  “  a  certain  esquire,”  while 
about  the  Princess  he  observes  severely  :  De  Matilda 
penitus  taceo ,  quia  nihil  dignum  egit  memoria — 
“  About  Matilda  I  shall  say  nothing,  because  she  did 
nothing  worthy  of  record. ”f 

Princess  Margaret,  the  younger  sister,  married 
William,  Earl  of  Sutherland. 

Besides  these,  King  Robert  left  a  number  of 


*  Acts  of  the  Parliament  of  Scotland ,  i.,  514. 
f  Fordun,  lxxviii. 


1329  a. D.]  Death  of  Robert  de  Brus. 


355 


natural  children,  of  whom  the  most  distinguished 
was  Sir  Robert  de  Brus,  who  fell  at  the  battle  of 
Dupplin  in  1332.  He  received  extensive  lands  from 
his  father,  among  others  those  of  Liddesdale  for¬ 
feited  by  de  Soulis ;  and  in  the  charters  conveying 
them  he  is  styled  by  the  King  filius  carissimus  or 
dilectissimus. 

Another  illegitimate  son,  Walter,  owned  the  lands 
of  Odiston  on  the  Clyde,  and  died  before  his  father. 
Nigel  de  Bruce,  slain  at  the  battle  of  Durham,  was 
also,  it  is  almost  certain,  the  king’s  son.  Attempts 
have  been  made  to  prove  the  legitimacy  of  a  third 
daughter,  Elizabeth,  who  married  Sir  Walter  Oli- 
phant  of  Gask,  but  the  silence  of  Fordun  about  this 
lady  is,  as  Lord  Hailes  observes,  significant.  For¬ 
dun  could  not  have  been  ignorant  of  the  existence 
of  a  third  Princess  of  the  royal  house,  especially  as 
four  charters,  by  David  II.,  dated  February  28,  1364, 
are  preserved  among  the  Gask  muniments,  showing 
that  Elizabeth  was  alive  at  the  time  the  Gesta  An - 
nalia  were  being  written.  That  King  David  refers 
to  her  in  these  charters  as  dilecte  soron  nostre  does  not 
necessarily  imply  her  legitimacy,  any  more  than  that 
of  the  base-born  Sir  Robert  de  Brus  was  implied  when 
his  father  styled  him  filius  carissimus. 

Another  natural  daughter,  Margaret,  who  married 
Robert  Glen,  has  been  confused  with  Princess  Mar¬ 
garet,  who  has  been  supposed  to  have  been  the  widow 
of  Glen  when  she  married  the  Earl  of  Sutherland  ; 
but  as  the  Chamberlain’s  accounts  show  that  she 
was  still  unmarried  in  1343,  and  Countess  of  Suth¬ 
erland  in  1345,  there  was  hardly  time  for  a  previous 
marriage,  nor  does  Fordun  make  any  allusion  to  it. 


Thomas,  Earl  of  Lancaster. 


Sir  Richard  Fitz  Alan, 
Earl  of  Arundel. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

EXPEDITION  OF  DOUGLAS  :  HIS  DEATH,  AND  TPIAT 

OF  MORAY. 

A.D.  I329-I332. 

THE  service  which  King  Robert  had  laid  upon 
the  Lord  of  Douglas,  was  one  which  not  only 
removed  from  the  defence  of  Scotland  her 
most  experienced  soldier  and  perhaps  the  coolest 
head  in  her  council,  but  also  exposed  him  to  mortal 
peril.  Not  the  less  would  he  relish  it  on  that  ac- 
account ;  but  one  is  tempted  to  impute  to  King 
Robert  a  selfish  anxiety  for  the  safety  of  his  soul 
and  the  renown  of  his  name,  in  thus  depriving  the 
boy  king  and  the  Scottish  nation  of  the  presence  of 
such  a  valuable  counsellor,  and  of  ingratitude  in 
adding  such  an  onerous  and  perilous  task  to  the 
long  list  of  duties  already  done.  But  the  charac¬ 
ter  of  the  mission,  futile  and  superfluous  as  it 
seems  in  the  cold  light  of  modern  days,  must  be 
judged  according  to  the  doctrine  of  crusading  times. 

356 


MELROSE  ABBEY,  FROM  SOUTH-EAST. 

{From  a  photograph  by  Valentine  Bros Dundee .) 


1329-32  a.d.]  Expedition  of  Douglas. 


357 


Not  only  was  it  held  incumbent  on  every  true  Chris¬ 
tian  to  take  no  rest  till  the  Saracens  were  expelled 
from  the  holy  city,  but  King  Robert  and  his  subjects 
firmly  believed  that  the  guilt  which  lay  upon  his 
conscience  could  only  be  atoned  for  by  some  signal 
service  done  to  the  Cross.  Both  Barbour  and  Frois¬ 
sart,  in  their  accounts  of  the  King’s  dying  words, 
dwell  on  the  emphasis  he  laid  on  this. 

“  For  throu  me  and  my  warraying 
Of  blud  thar  has  bene  gret  spilling, 

Quhar  mony  sakless  *  men  was  slane.” 

So  that  the  King  believed  that,  besides  the  jeopardy 
of  his  own  salvation,  unknown  evils  might  descend 
upon  his  beloved  people  if  no  special  act  of  atone¬ 
ment  were  undertaken.  This  enterprise,  then,  which 
seems  quixotic,  or,  at  best,  romantic,  in  oui  eyes, 
partook  in  the  fourteenth  century  of  the  nature  of 
State  policy. 

There  may  have  been  this  further  thought  in  the 
dying  King’s  mind.  Thomas,  Earl  of  Moiay,  and 
James,  Lord  of  Douglas,  had  long  been  generous 
rivals  in  the  service  of  King  and  country.  It  had  re¬ 
quired  a  little  tact,  sometimes,  to  keep  this  rivalry 
within  bounds ;  witness  that  little  scene  between 
Ring  Robert  and  Lyn  of  Spalding,  before  the  suc¬ 
cessful  assault  on  Berwick.  When  Lyn  levealed  the 
plan  by  which  he  proposed  to  deliver  the  town,  the 

King  said  : 


*  Innocent. 


358 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1329  A. D.- 


“  Certes  thou  wrocht  has  wis, 

That  thou  discoverit  the  first  to  me, 

For,  gif  thou  had  discoverit  the 
Io  my  nevo  the  erl  Thomas 
Thou  suld  disples  the  lord  Douglas, 

And  him  alsua  in  the  contrer  ; 

Bot  I  sail  wirk  on  sic  maner 
That  thou  at  thyn  entent  sail  be 
And  haf  of  nane  of  tham  magre.  ”  * 

The  dying  King  may  have  reflected  that,  after  he 
should  pass  away,  there  would  be  no  one  to  keep 
these  fiery  spirits  in  harmony.  Moray  would  at  once, 
as  Parliament  had  enacted,  assume  the  Regency,  and 
it  might  be  well  that  Douglas  should  have  his  hands 
full  elsewhere. 

Lastly,  and  perhaps  most  pressing  of  all,  there  was 
the  King’s  unfulfilled  oath  to  make  war  on  the  Infi¬ 
del.  Official  oaths  of  fealty  might  be  broken  with¬ 
out  loss  of  honour,  a  doctrine  in  which  King  Robert 
had  proved  his  belief ;  but  a  knight’s  vow  must  be 
fulfilled  at  all  cost  and  hazard. 

Thus  widely  different  must  we  esteem  the  motives 
which  guided  him  in  his  latest  act  from  any  that 
would  influence  a  modern  statesman. 

In  conformity  with  the  Act  of  Settlement  of  1318, 
the  Earl  of  Moray  entered  upon  the  Regency  of  the 
kingdom,  and  applied  himself  to  the  affairs  of  gov¬ 
ernment,  leaving  Douglas  free  to  prepare  for  his  ex¬ 
pedition.  This  was  set  about  leisurely,  on  a  scale 
befitting  such  a  renowned  chevalier  and  such  a  sol¬ 
emn  occasion. 

The  material  interests  of  the  Church,  as  was  usual, 


*  Magre,  displeasure  (  The  Brus ,  cxxv.,  88). 


1332  A.D.] 


Expedition  of  Douglas. 


359 


were  not  forgotten.  Douglas  commended  himself 
to  her  prayers,  and  especially  to  the  protection  of 
his  patron  saint,  St.  Bride,  on  whose  commemora¬ 
tion  day,  February  i,  1330,  he  bestowed  lands  on  the 
Abbey  of  Newbottle.  The  intention  of  this  gift  is 
made  clear  in  the  Register  of  Newbottle,  where  it  is 
recorded.  It  was  made  in  the  personal  interest  of 
Douglas,  to  secure  the  special  intercession  of  St. 
B-ride  with  the  Almighty  for  himself,  and  by  her 
merits  and  prayers  purchase  what  was  needful  for 
his  body  and  soul.  A  choral  mass  was  to  be  per¬ 
formed  at  the  altar  of  St.  Bride  within  the  monas¬ 
tery  on  each  anniversary  of  the  saint,  and  thirteen 
poor  people  were  to  be  entertained  on  the  same  day. 
On  September  1,  1329,  Edward  III.  issued  letters  of 
protection  to  James  Lord  of  Douglas,  on  his  way  to 
the  Holy  Land  with  the  heart  of  the  late  King  of 
Scots  in  aid  of  the  Christians  against  the  Saracens. 

The  difficulty  and  magnitude  of  the  enterprise 
were  not  under-estimated,  for  the  protection  was 
made  to  cover  seven  years.  On  the  same  day  King 
Edward  wrote  a  letter  commending  Douglas  to  Al¬ 
fonso,  King  of  Castile  and  Leon. 

In  the  spring  of  133°  the  Lord  of  Douglas  em¬ 
barked,  at  Berwick  according  to  Barbour,  but  more 
probably  at  Montrose  as  F roissart  states,  having  in 
charge  the  King’s  heart  in 

“ - ane  cas  of  silver  fyn 

Enamalit  throu  subtilite,” 

and  accompanied  by  a  knight  banneret,  seven  other 
knights,  twenty-six  esquires,  and  a  very  large  retinue. 


*  Bain,  iii. ,  179- 


36° 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1329  A.D.- 


The  flotilla  remained  twelve  days  at  Sluys,  in  or¬ 
der  to  give  other  knights-errant  the  opportunity  of 
joining  in  the  adventure,  but  Douglas  never  left  his 
ship.  He  received  many  visitors  on  board  in  princely 
fashion,  keeping  open  table,  and  treating  his  guests 
with  wines  of  two  kinds  and  different  kinds  of  spice. 

Alfonso  XI.,  King  of  Castile,  being  then  at  war 
with  Osmyn,  the  Moorish  Prince  of  Granada,  Doug¬ 
las  before  leaving  Scotland  had  resolved  to  take  part 
in  that  holy  war,  as  it  was  considered,  on  his  way  to 
Jerusalem.  So  he  sailed  as  far  south  as  Seville, 
where,  after  resting  awhile  to  restore  men  and  horses 
from  the  fatigue  of  a  stormy  passage,  he  rode  to 
King  Alfonso’s  camp  on  the  frontiers,  and  was  re¬ 
ceived  with  much  honour. 

There  were  knights  from  many  lands  serving  un¬ 
der  the  King  of  Castile,  for  the  chivalry  of  Europe 
desired  no  better  quarrel  than  that  of  a  Christian 
monarch  against  the  Paynim,  wherein  renown  and 
ransom  might  be  secured  to  make  this  life  worth 
living,  as  well  as  salvation  ensured  for  the  life  to 
come.  By  none  of  these  foreign  cavaliers  was  Doug¬ 
las  welcomed  more  heartily  than  by  the  English. 
Among  these  soldiers  of  fortune  and  the  Cross  there 
was  one  of  wide-spread  fame  for  his  deeds  of  arms. 
Now  it  had  been  the  fortune  of  this  knight  to  re¬ 
ceive  so  many  wounds  that  his  face  was  all  hacked 
to  pieces.  He  expressed  a  great  desire  to  see  Doug¬ 
las,  of  whose  renown  he  had  heard  so  much,  in  order 
to  compare  notes  on  mutilation.  Great  was  his  sur¬ 
prise  to  find  that  there  was  not  a  single  scar  on  the 
Scottish  knight’s  visage.  “  Praised  be  God  !  ” 


ex- 


1332  A.D.] 


Death  of  Douglas. 


361 


claimed  Douglas,  “  I  have  always  had  hands  to  pro¬ 
tect  my  head.” 

On  August  25,  1330,  the  Spanish  host  was  drawn 
up  near  Theba  on  the  frontier  of  Andalusia:  op¬ 
posite  to  them,  on  the  territory  of  Granada,  lay  the 
Moors.  King  Alfonso  ordered  a  forward  movement, 
which  Douglas,  who  rode  with  his  Scottish  squad¬ 
ron,  on  one  of  his  flanks,  mistook  for  a  general  at¬ 
tack.  He  carried  the  silver  casket  containing  the 
heart  of  the  Bruce  slung  round  his  neck,  and,  being 
thus  distinguished,  his  zeal  for  the  foremost  place 
overbore  the  cool  prudence  with  which  he  had  saved 
so  many  fields.  “  A  Douglas  !  a  Douglas !  ’  he  cried, 
and  made  his  trumpets  sound  the  charge.  Away 
went  the  Scottish  squadron,  determined  to  be  the 
first  to  draw  blood,  and  believing  that  the  Spanish 
men-at-arms  were  charging  too.  But,  unknown  to 
Douglas,  these  had  been  ordered  to  halt,  while  the 
Scots  rode  on. 

Now  on  the  face  of  God’s  earth  there  were  no 
more  dangerous  fighters  than  the  Moslem  cavalry. 
Many  a  time  had  Douglas’s  battle  fury  and  sinewy 
arm  turned  the  scale  against  tremendous  odds,  but 
these  lithe  Saracens  swarmed  around  him  like  wasps. 
The  little  company  of  Scots  were  engulfed  among 
them  ;  weaker  and  weaker  sounded  the  well-known 
battle-cry,  “  A  Douglas!”  It  is  said  that  Douglas 
might  have  made  good  his  escape  but  that,  seeing 
Sir  William  de  St.  Clair  hardly  pressed,  he  spurred 
to  his  rescue.  Douglas  fell,  and  with  him  many  of 
his  brothers  in  arms. 

In  the  above  brief  recital  of  the  death  of  Robert 


362 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1329  A.D.- 


de  Brus’s  most  faithful  subject,  reliance  has  been 
placed  chiefly  on  the  narrative  of  Froissart.  Barbour 
gives  a  slightly  different  account  of  it,  placing 
Douglas  in  command  of  the  whole  vanguard  of  the 
Spanish  army.  It  is  not  likely  that  he  was  responsi¬ 
ble  for  more  than  his  immediate  following,  if  for  no 
other  reason  than  because  of  the  difficulty  of  con¬ 
veying  accurate  commands  in  a  foreign  language. 
Boece  has  followed  Holland,  an  allegorical  writer  of 
the  fifteenth  century,  and  Hume  of  Godscroft  has 
followed  both,  in  drawing  a  romantic  picture  of 
Douglas  flinging  the  heart  of  the  Bruce  among  the 
Saracens  before  he  charged  them,  exclaiming — “  Now 
pass  thou  forth  before,  as  thou  wert  ever  won’t  to  be 
in  the  field,  and  I  shall  follow  thee  or  die  !  ” 

But  this  is  myth  of  that  nature,  of  which,  if  history 
is  to  be  written  at  all,  it  must  be  scrupulously  purged. 

After  the  fray  the  heart  of  the  King  of  Scots  was 
recovered  and  having  been  taken  back  to  Scotland 
by  some  of  Douglas’s  sorrowing  comrades  was  buried 
in  Melrose  Abbey.  They  brought  home,  too,  the 
body  of  the  Black  Douglas,  and  laid  it  in  the  chapel 
of  St.  Bride  at  Douglas.  The  tomb  stands  on  the 
north  side  of  the  aisle  and  is  believed  to  have  been 
erected  some  years  after  his  death  by  his  son, 
Archibald  the  Grim,  Lord  of  Galloway. 

“The  effigy,”  says  Blore,  “is  of  dark  stone,  cross-legged.  The 
right  hand  has  been  represented  in  the  act  of  drawing  the  sword,  the 
scabbard  of  which  is  held  by  the  left.  Owing,  however,  to  injury  the 
figure  has  sustained,  the  right  arm  and  hand  are  broken  off  and  lost, 
from  the  shoulder  downwards,  as  in  the  corresponding  leg  from  the 
knee.  The  long  pointed  shield  which  he  bears  on  his  left  arm  is 


TOMB  OF  SIR  JAMES  DOUGLAS)  IN  ST.  BRIDE’S  CHAPEL  OF  DOUGLAS. 

( From  Fraser's  “ The  Douglas  Book”  Edinburgh ,  1895.) 


1332  A.D.] 


Death  of  Douglas. 


363 


without  armorial  bearing  *  and  much  broken.  The  general  style  of 
the  figure  is  rather  rude,  with  the  exception  of  the  folds  of  the  drapery 
of  the  surcoat  which,  in  many  parts,  are  simple  and  well  arranged. 
The  armour  is  destitute  of  the  slightest  indication  of  chain-work ;  and 
it  is  therefore  probable  that  a  different  material  was  intended  to  be 
represented,  or  that  the  chain-work  was  represented  by  colours  now 
obliterated.  The  feet  rest  against  the  mutilated  remains  of  an  animal, 
probably  a  lion  .  .  .  The  arch,  under  which  the  effigy  is  placed, 

appears  to  be  of  rather  more  modern  workmanship  .  .  .  The 

shield  under  the  canopy  of  the  arch  contains  the  heart,  in  addition  to 
the  armorial  bearings  of  the  family,  granted  in  consequence  of  his 
mission  to  the  Holy  Land,  but  the  three  mullets  are  now  completely 
obliterated.”  f 

Cromwell  and  his  soldiers  have  been  popularly 
credited  with  the  defacement  of  this  and  other  monu¬ 
ments  in  St.  Bride’s  Chapel  of  Douglas,  while  they 
were  besieging  the  castle  in  1651.  But  in  truth  the 
ecclesiastical  monuments  of  Scotland  passed  into  such 
sorry  plight  during  and  after  the  Reformation,  that 
it  would  be  difficult,  especially  in  this,  the  heart  of 
the  Covenanting  district,  to  assign  to  any  persons  in 
particular  the  discredit  of  wrecking  this  historic  shrine. 
The  present  Earl  of  Home,  upon  whom,  through  the 
female  line,  have  descended  the  honours  and  posses¬ 
sions  of  the  House  of  Douglas,  has  reverently  repaired 
the  chancel  of  St.  Bride’s  Chapel,  and  this  tomb  and 
the  other  relics  of  a  great  race  preserved  there  are 
safe,  let  it  be  hoped,  from  further  desecration. 

Enclosed  in  stone  and  glass  on  the  altar  steps  may 
be  seen  two  heart-shaped  leaden  caskets,  one  of 
which  is  reputed  to  contain  the  heait  of  the  Black 
Douglas.  But  it  is  more  probable  that  they  hold  the 

*  The  arms  were  probably  painted  on  it  when  new. 

■j-  Blore’s  Monumental  Remains. 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1329  A.D.- 


3^4 

hearts  of  the  fifth  and  eighth  Earls  of  Angus,  the 
former  of  whom — Archibald  “  Bell-the-Cat  ” — lies  in 
St.  Ninian’s  church  at  Whithorn. 

The  personal  appearance  of  the  greatest  of  Bruce’s 
subjects  has  been  portrayed  by  Barbour,  writing 
from  the  description  of  those  who  knew  the  Black 
Douglas  in  life. 

“  Bot  he  was  nocht  sa  far  *  that  we 
Suld  spek  gretly  of  his  beaute. 

In  visage  was  he  sumdele  gray, 

And  had  blak  har,  as  I  herd  say  ; 

Bot  of  limmis  he  was  wele  mad, 

With  banisf  gret  and  schuldris  brad  ; 

His  body  was  wele  mad  and  lenyhe  % 

As  tha  that  saw  him  said  to  me. 

Quhen  he  was  blith  he  was  lufly, 

And  mek  and  suet  in  cumpany, 

But  quha  in  battale  micht  him  se, 

All  othir  contenans  had  he, 

And  in  spek  ulispit  §  he  sumdele, 

Bot  that  sat  him  richt  wondir  wele.” 


The  fierceness  of  the  countenance  of  Douglas  in 
battle  seems  to  have  been  a  quality  transmitted  to 
his  natural  son,  Archibald  “  the  Grim,”  who,  in  later 
years,  succeeded  to  the  Douglas  honours  and  es¬ 
tates  as  third  Earl  of  Douglas.  He  obtained  his 
popular  sobriquet,  not,  as  might  be  imagined, 
from  cruel  or  rigorous  behaviour,  for  he  was  a  wise 
and  painstaking  ruler  of  Douglasdale  and  Galloway, 
but,  says  Sir  Richard  Maitland,  he  “  was  callit 
Archibald  Grym  be  the  Englismen,  becaus  of  his 


*  Fair. 


f  Bones. 


%  Lean. 


§  Lisped. 


1332  A.D.] 


Death  of  Douglas . 


365 


terrible  countenance  in  weirfair.”  *  The  same  writer 
adds  that  Robert  II.  conferred  the  lordship  of  Gal¬ 
loway  on  Archibald,  “  becaus  he  tuke  grit  trawell  to 
purge  the  country  of  Englis  blude.” 

Among  the  heirlooms  preserved  in  Douglas  Castle 
is  a  sword,  said  to  have  been  given  by  King  Rob¬ 
ert  as  he  lay  dying  to  “good  Sir  James.  The 
blade,  very  likely,  is  genuine,  but  the  legend  bitten 
into  it  with  acid  is  certainly  of  later  date,  as  at¬ 
tested  not  only  by  the  characters,  which  are  not 
earlier  than  the  sixteenth  century,  but  the  refeience 
to  the  number  of  distinguished  subjects  of  the  name 
of  Douglas.  The  lines  run  as  follows  : 

SO  MONY  GVID  AS  OF  THE  DOVGLAS  BEINE, 

OF  ANE  SVRNAME,  WAS  NEVER  IN  SCOTLAND  SEINE. 

I  WIL  YE  CHARGE,  EFTER  THAT  I  DEPART, 

TO  HOLY  GRAVFE,  AND  THAIR  BVRY  MY  HART  : 

LET  IT  REMAIN  EVER,  BOTH  TYME  AND  HOVR, 

TO  THE  LAST  DAY  I  SIE  MY  SAVIOVR. 

SO  I  PROTEST  IN  TYME  OF  AL  MY  RINGE, 

YE  LYK  SUBIECTIS  HAD  NEVER  ONY  KEING. 

The  royal  arms  of  Scotland  are  graven  on  one  side 
of  the  blade,  surmounted  with  a  crown ;  on  the 
other  side  is  represented  a  heart,  towards  which  two 
hands  point,  over  one  of  which  aie  the  letteis, 
K.  R.  B.  (King  Robert  Bruce),  over  the  other, 
I.  L.  D.  (James  Lord  Douglas).f  It  will  be  perceived 

*  Warfare. 

f  In  1745,  some  of  the  Highlanders,  retreating  from  England,  un¬ 
der  Prince  Charles  Edward,  were  quartered  at  Douglas  Castle  and 
carried  off  the  Bruce  sword  when  they  moved  north.  It  cost  some 
troublesome  negociation  to  get  it  back  again. 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1329  A.D. 


366 

that  these  initials  are  quite  inconsistent  with  four¬ 
teenth  century  practice. 

Before  taking  final  leave  of  Douglas  Castle  and  its 
associations  with  Robert  the  Bruce,  it  may  not  be 
out  of  place  to  add  to  its  memories  one  connected 
with  another  great  Scotsman.  When  Sir  Walter 
Scott,  broken  in  health  and  fortune,  travelled  thither 
to  study  the  scenery  of  his  last  romance,  Castle 
Dangerous ,  he  gazed  on  the  landscape  till,  it  is  said, 
his  eyes  filled  with  tears,  and  he  repeated  the  words, 
spoken  by  a  descendant  of  the  Black  Douglas,  as  he 
lay  dying  at  Otterburn. 


“  My  wound  is  deep,  I  fain  would  sleep  ; 
Take  thou  the  vanguard  of  the  three. 
And  hide  me  by  the  bracken  bush, 

That  grows  on  yonder  lilye  lee. 

“  Oh  !  bury  me  by  the  bracken  bush, 
Beneath  the  blooming  brier, 

And  never  let  living  mortal  ken 
That  e’er  a  kindly  Scott  lies  here.” 


There  remains  to  be  told,  in  a  few  words,  the  re¬ 
maining  acts  of  King  Robert’s  other  great  servant, 
Randolph,  Earl  of  Moray. 

David  II.  and  his  consort  Johanna,  sister  of  Ed¬ 
ward  III.,  were  crowned  at  Scone,  on  November 
24,  1331.  Moray,  from  the  first,  vigilantly  and 
sagaciously  discharged  the  duties  of  Regent.  One 
of  his  first  recorded  acts  was  one  of  considerable 
moment  in  respect  of  future  relations  with  the 
Church  of  Rome.  Ecclesiastical  interference  was 


1332  A.D.] 


Death  of  Moray. 


3^7 


not  only  the  rule  in  the  politics  of  the  fourteenth 
century  ;  it  extended  to  arbitrary  dislocation  of  the 
course  of  civil  justice.  It  is  said  that  a  certain  man, 
who  had  murdered  a  priest,  went  to  the  Papal  court, 
purchased  his  absolution,  and  returned  confidently 
to  Scotland.  Moray  ordered  him  to  be  arrested  and 
tried.  The  assassin  was  convicted,  and  notwith¬ 
standing  the  Pope’s  absolution,  was  hanged.  “  For,” 
said  the  Regent,  “  though  his  Holiness  may  free  a 
man  from  his  guilt ,  he  cannot  interfere  with  punish¬ 
ment  for  the  offence .” 

Wyntown,  in  recording  this  incident,  says  that 
by  this  strict  administration  of  law,  and  by  making 
local  magistrates  responsible  for  crimes  committed 
within  their  jurisdiction,  Moray  caused  the  whole 
country  to  become  as  secure  as  a  man’s  own  house. 

But  beyond  the  limits  of  the  realm  fresh  trouble 
was  brewing. 

The  treaty  of  Northampton  had  been  the  work  of 
Mortimer,  the  husband  of  the  Queen-Mother  of 
England.  The  article  under  which  Henry  de  Percy, 
Lord  Wake  of  Liddel,  and  Henry  de  Beaumont, 
Earl  of  Buchan,  were  guaranteed  the  restoration  of 
their  ancient  possessions  in  Scotland,  to  the  exclu¬ 
sion  of  the  other  lords  who  had  been  dispossessed, 
had  been  fulfilled  only  in  the  case  of  Percy.  The 
delay  in  the  cases  of  Wake  and  de  Beaumont  does 
not  admit  of  easy  explanation. 

Meanwhile,  de  Beaumont,  who  had  been  among 
the  foremost  in  action  against  the  Despensers  in  the 
reign  of  Edward  II.,  had  suffered  imprisonment  and 
exile  for  his  share  in  the  events  of  that  period,  and 


368 


Robert  the  Bruce . 


[1329  A.D.- 


had  warmly  espoused  the  cause  of  Queen  Isabella 
and  Mortimer,  took  part  in  the  conspiracy  to  effect 
Mortimer’s  downfall. 

Mortimer  was  executed  on  November  29,  1330. 
De  Beaumont  then  put  forward  a  claim,  not  only  for 
the  restoration  of  his  own  lands  in  Scotland,  but  for 
that  of  the  lands  of  all  the  other  dispossessed  barons 
— les  querelleurSy  as  they  came  to  be  termed. 

On  December  1st,  King  Edward  demanded  the  ful¬ 
filment  of  the  treaty  by  the  restoration  of  their  lands 
to  de  Beaumont  and  Wake.  Moray  still  delayed  com¬ 
pliance.  He  could  not  be  deaf  to  the  reports  that 
while  the  King  was  urging  the  fulfilment  of  a  single 
clause  in  the  treaty,  de  Beaumont  was  fomenting  an 
agitation  against  the  whole  of  it,  on  the  ground  of  its 
injustice  to  all  the  disinherited  lords.  Revolutions 
had  followed  each  other  so  swiftly  in  England  that 
nothing  was  more  likely  than  that  de  Beaumont  and 
his  party  should  get  the  upper  hand.  It  boded  no 
good  that  Edward  de  Balliol,  son  of  the  ex-King 
John,  had  been  taken  under  the  protection  of  the 
English  court  on  October  10,  1330. 

Edward  III.  desired  peace,  for  on  March  24,  1332, 
he  issued  a  proclamation  against  certain  men  of  his 
kingdom  and  others  (et  alii ,  meaning  Edward  Balliol 
and  his  following)  who,  as  many  persons  had  told 
him,  were  conspiring  to  break  the  peace  made  with 
Robert  de  Brus,  late  King  of  Scots,  and  preparing 
an  invasion  of  the  Scottish  Marches.  But  Edward 
was  young  and  weak  in  the  hands  of  these  powerful 
lords.  Within  a  month  he  signed  a  demand  on  the 
Scottish  Regent  for  the  restoration  of  the  lands  of 


Death  of  Moray. 


1332  A.O.] 


Lord  Wake,  one  of  these  very  diversi  homines  whose 
action  he  had  condemned. 

Nevertheless  King  Edward  was  honorably  de¬ 
termined  to  keep  the  peace  as  long  as  he  could.  He 
would  not  allow  the  Marches  to  be  violated  ;  so  de 
Beaumont,  having  with  him  Edward  de  Balliol,  400 
men  at  arms  and  3000  infantry,  adopted  the  ex¬ 
pedient  of  embarking  at  the  mouth  of  the  Humber 
for  the  invasion  of  Scotland.  The  other  barons  with 
him  were  Gilbert  de  Umfraville,  Thomas  Lord  Wake, 
Henry  de  Ferrers  and  his  two  brothers,  David  de 
Strathbogie,  Richard  Talbot,  Henry,  the  brother  of 
Edward  de  Balliol,  four  knights  named  de  Moubray, 
Walter  Comyn,  Fulke  Fitz  Warine,  and  Roger  de 
Swinerton. 

The  Regent,  who  was  suffering  grievously  from 
stone,  advanced  at  the  head  of  an  army  to  repel  the 
invasion.  He  moved  first  to  Cockburnspath,  in  East 
Lothian,  but,  hearing  that  the  enemy  was  approaching 
by  sea,  he  turned  northward  to  protect  the  Forth. 
His  malady  grew  worse,  and  he  died  at  Musselburgh 
on  July  20th.  Barbour  and  Fordun  allege  that  he  died 
by  poison,  which,  like  much  other  idle  contemporary 
gossip,  was  expanded  by  Boece  into  an  elaborate 
story,  to  the  effect  that  the  poison  was  administered 
by  a  monk,  who  undertook  to  treat  Moray  for  his 
painful  malady.  Having  done  so,  the  monk  re¬ 
turned  to  Edward  III.,  whose  agent  he  was,  to  report 
that  the  slow  poison  was  doing  its  work.  This  fable 
having  thus  found  its  way  into  Scottish  history,  was 
diligently  repeated  by  one  authority  after  another, 
till  Lord  Hailes  exposed  its  baselessness,  exclaim- 


24 


370 


Robert  the  Bruce. 


[1332  A.D. 


ing,  “  Must  the  King  of  England  be  answerable  for 
all  the  murders  committed  by  English  quacks,  even 
in  foreign  parts?” 

It  is  not,  indeed,  necessary  to  assume  malevolence 
on  the  part  of  anyone.  There  was  quite  enough  in 
Moray’s  disease  to  account  for  his  death  by  natural 
causes,  under  circumstances  when  it  was  not  possible 
for  him  to  receive  the  care  and  rest  needful  for  a 
cure. 

Of  Moray’s  personal  appearance  Barbour  has  left 
but  a  short  note,  probably  drawn  from  his  own  ob¬ 
servation.  He  says  that  he  was  of  middle  stature 
and  compactly  built,  with  a  pleasant,  open  counte¬ 
nance  and  gentle  manners.  Of  his  capacity  as  a 
military  commander  the  best  evidence  is  found  in  the 
uniform  success  which  he  achieved  in  many  years  of 
warfare,  generally  against  greatly  superior  numbers 
while  his  wisdom  as  a  ruler  perhaps  may  best  be 
realized  by  comparing  the  state  of  affairs  in  Scot¬ 
land  under  his  government  with  that  which  prevailed 
under  another  nephew  of  King  Robert  who  suc¬ 
ceeded  Moray  in  the  Regency — Donald,  Earl  of 
Mar. 


Sir  Simon  de  Fraser. 


INDEX. 


/ 


A 

Aberdeen,  Bishop  of,  loyalty  to 
Edward  I.,  go  ;  excommunica¬ 
tion  of,  272 

Aberdeen,  Bruce  in  the  neigh¬ 
bourhood  of,  137 
Abernethy,  Alexander  of,  de¬ 
puted  to  capture  Wallace,  113 
Act  of  Settlement,  fate  of  an,  304 
Alan,  Sir  Brian  fitz,  appointed 
Governor  of  Scotland,  90 
Alban,  the  four  separate  king¬ 
doms  of  ancient,  28 
Alexander  I.,  the  Fierce,  death 
of,  26 

Alexander  II.,  Lord  Hailes  on 
the  succession  to,  66  ;  decision 
of,  as  to  Bruce,  the  Competi¬ 
tor’s  election  to  the  throne, 
67 

Alexander  III.,  marriage  of,  34  ; 
sentiment  of  nationality  aroused 
by,  ib. ;  does  homage  to  Edward 
I.,  35  5  death  of,  36  ;  civil  war 
following  on  the  death  of,  39 
Alnwick  Castle,  siege  of,  320 
Angus,  Earl  of,  see  Umfraville 
Angus  of  the  Isles,  hospitality  to 
Bruce  by,  144 

Annales  Londinenses,  the,  172 
Annals ,  the  work  of  Lord  Hailes 
entitled,  13 


Arbroath,  letter  to  Pope  John 
XXII.,  from  laymen  at,  272- 
274 

Argentine,  Sir  Giles  de,  bravery 
of,  at  the  battle  of  Bannock¬ 
burn,  49 

Argyll,  Bruce  in,  184,  185 
Arran,  reconnaissance  by  Dou¬ 
glas  in,  146  ;  arrival  of  Bruce 
in,  ib.,  147 

Arscoll,  battle  of,  236 
Arundel,  Earl  of,  leads  an  Eng¬ 
lish  force  into  Scotland,  246  ; 
defeated  by  Douglas,  247 
Athol,  Earl  of,  accompanies 
Edward  I.  to  France,  90;  exe¬ 
cution  of,  140 

Athol,  Earl  of  (David),  captures 
Brechin  Castle,  180  ;  doubtful 
allegiance  to  Bruce  of,  212 
Aula  Rubra,  see  Red  Hall 
Avignon,  Randolph  Moray’s  mis¬ 
sion  to  the  Pope  at,  293 
Ayr,  Bruce  holds  a  Parliament  at, 
189,  229 

Ayr  Castle,  Bruce  appointed 
Governor  of,  112 


B 

Bain,  Mr.  Joseph,  historical 
labours  of,  3,  319 


37i 


372 


Index. 


Balliol,  Edward  de,  sent  to  the 
Tower,  94  ;  recalled  to  Eng¬ 
land  from  Normandy,  297  ; 
joins  in  an  invasion  of  Scot¬ 
land,  369 

Balliol,  John  de,  pleads  his  claim 
to  the  Scottish  Crown,  40  ; 
acknowledges  the  King  of 
England  as  Lord  Paramount 
of  Scotland,  57  ;  commission 
considers  a  claim  to  the  throne 


of,  62  ;  the  kingdom  of  Scot¬ 
land  handed  over  to,  68  ; 
crowned  at  Scone,  ib.;  releases 
Edward  I.  from  all  agreements, 
69  ;  humiliating  treatment  of, 
by  Edward  I.,  70 ;  refuses  to 
comply  with  King  Edward  s 
summons  to  London,  71  5 
enters  into  a  secret  treaty  with 
King  Philip  of  France,  ib.;  is 
defeated  at  Dunbar,  75  ;  resig¬ 
nation  of,  77  ;  later  career  of, 
78;  exiled  to  France,  ib.; 
death  of,  79 

Balliol,  Sir  William  de,  leads  a 
foray  of  the  Scots,  101 

Ban,  Donald,  reign  of,  25 

Bannockburn,  tactics  of  Bruce  at 
the  battle  of,  200-203  ;  Eng¬ 
lish  commanders  at,  203  ;  be¬ 
haviour  of  the  English  and 
Scottish  soldiers  before  the  bat¬ 
tle  of,  212;  position  of  the 
Scottish  army  at,  2 13-2 15  ; 
battle  of,  213-223  ;  magnifi¬ 
cent  appearance  of  the  English 
army  at,  215;  King  Edward’s 
remarks  on  the  Scottish  army 
at,  216;  excellent  choice  of 
ground  by  Bruce  at,  ib.; 
Edward  de  Brus’s  generalship, 
217  ;  final  rout  of  the  English 
at,  218  ;  flight  of  Edward  II. 
after  the  battle  of,  219-223  ; 
English  losses  at,  220  ;  Scottish 
losses  at,  223 

Barbour,  The  Bnis  by,  5y7  5  pen¬ 
sions  awarded  to,  8  ;  gift  of  the 
ward  of  a  minor  to,  ib.;  ac¬ 


count  of  the  battle  of  Bannock¬ 
burn  by,  203  ;  incidents  of 
Bruce’s  invasion  of  Ireland  re¬ 
lated  by,  240 ;  on  the  death  of 
Bruce,  338 

Baston,  poem  on  the  victory  at 
Bannockburn  by,  2,  212 
Bath,  Bishop  of,  King  Edward’s 
spokesman  at  Upsettlington, 

57 

Beaumont,  Henry  de,  Earl  of 
Buchan,  appointed  a  Guardian 
of  Scotland,  186  ;  at  the  battle 
of  Bannockburn,  208  ;  quarrels 
with  Moray  as  to  the  restora¬ 
tion  of  his  lands,  368  ;  invades 
Scotland,  369 

Beck,  Anthony,  Bishop  of  Dur¬ 
ham,  appointed  Lieutenant 
of  Scotland,  45  I  capture  of 
Dirleton  Castle  by,  95  5  in 
command  of  cavalry  at  the  bat¬ 
tle  of  Falkirk,  97  ;  warlike 
spirit  of,  326 

Berwick,  meeting  of  Scottish 
commissioners  at,  62  ;  Parlia¬ 
ment  at,  64,  80;  sack  of,  by 
Edward  I.,  72-74  5  a  mutiny 
in  the  English  garrison  at,  in; 
Nigel  Bruce  executed  at,  139  ; 
assault  on,  by  Bruce,  190,  233  ; 
siege  of,  233,  255,  265-270 ; 
fight  between  de  Neville  and 
Douglas  at,  248  ;  trade  of, 

348  1  1 

Bigod,  de,  Earl  Marshal,  in  com¬ 
mand  of  the  English  cavalry  at 
the  battle  of  Falkirk,  97 
Biland,  battle  of,  283 
Birgham,  treaty  of,  44 
Blackburn,  Robert  de,  gallant 
feat  of,  257 

Boece,  Hector,  historical  inac¬ 
curacies  of,  11 

Bohun,  Sir  Henry  de,  combat  be¬ 
tween  Bruce  and,  205 
Bonkil,  Sir  John  of,  supports  the 
claim  of  Robert  de  Brus,  the 
Competitor,  to  the  Scottish 
throne,  41 


Index . 


373 


Bothwell  Castle,  Edward  I. 
captures,  no;  Edward  de 
Brus  captures,  225 

Bower,  Walter,  edition  of  the 
Scotichronicon  by,  9 

Bowmaker,  Walter,  see  Bower, 
Walter 

Breaux,  family  name  of  Bruce, 
17 

Brechin,  Sir  David  de,  joins  the 
national  cause,  180 ;  tragic 
fate  of,  276 

Bretaine,  Sir  John  de,  appointed 
Warden  of  Scotland,  123 

Brodick  Castle,  Douglas  captures, 
146 

Bruce,  Robert,  difficulties  attend¬ 
ing  the  preparation  of  an  ac¬ 
count  of,  1,  2  ;  Wyntoun  on, 
10  ;  authenticity  of  the  chroni¬ 
cles  regarding,  11  ;  birth  of, 
17;  descent  of,  ib.,  21  ;  claim 
to  the  Scottish  throne  con¬ 
sidered  by  a  commission,  62  ; 
first  appearance  as  restorer  of 
the  Scottish  monarchy,  77  ; 
high  in  favour  with  Edward  I., 
81  ;  fights  on  the  side  of  Scot¬ 
tish  rebels,  85  ;  signs  a  con¬ 
fession  to  Edward  I.,  86  ;  atti¬ 
tude  of,  during  the  campaign 
of  Wallace,  98  ;  acts  a  double 
part,  no;  succeeds  to  his 
father’s  estates,  114;  list  of 
public  acts  of,  up  to  the  time 
of  Wallace’s  execution,  121  ; 
flight  from  England  of,  128  ; 
slays  John  Comyn,  129  ;  coro¬ 
nation  of,  131  ;  names  of  Scot¬ 
tish  nobles  present  at  the 
coronation  of,  132  ;  castles 
forfeited,  133  ;  sentence  of  ex- 
communication  passed  upon, 
134  ;  received  hospitably  by 
Angus  of  the  Isles,  144  ;  seeks 
shelter  in  Rachrin,  145  !  the 
island  of  Arran,  147  !  desperate 
condition  of  the  cause  of,  15 1  1 
adventures  in  the  land  of  Lorn, 
ib.;  pursued  by  a  bloodhound, 


154  ;  defeats  the  English  at 
Loudon  Hill,  164  ;  a  crisis  in 
the  fortunes  of,  165  ;  defeats 
de  Monthermer,  166  ;  invades 
Argyll,  184  ;  makes  a  raid  in 
Clydesdale,  187  ;  invades  Eng¬ 
land,  189  ;  holds  a  Parliament 
at  Ayr,  ib.,  229  ;  makes  an  un¬ 
successful  assault  on  Berwick, 
190  ;  captures  Perth  and  Dum¬ 
fries,  191  ;  magnanimous  treat¬ 
ment  of  Macdouall  by,  ib.; 
resides  at  Clackmannan  Castle, 
193  ;  reliance  upon  military 
skill  of,  199  ;  choice  of  ground 
at  Bannockburn  by,  201-203  ; 
orders  celebration  of  mass  in 
the  Scottish  camp,  203  ;  in¬ 
junctions  to  his  soldiers  by,  ib.; 
encounters  Sir  Henry  de 
Bohun,  205  ;  anecdote  of,  as 
to  a  relic  of  St.  Lilian,  210  ; 
clemency  of,  224  ;  prepares  to 
invade  Ireland,  228  ;  a  proba¬ 
ble  blunder  of,  ib.;  marriage 
of  Marjorie,  daughter  of,  230  ; 
expedition  to  the  Western  Isles 
by,  ib.;  invades  England,  231  ; 
lays  siege  to  Carlisle,  ib.;  at¬ 
tack  on  Berwick  by,  233  ; 
second  invasion  of  England  by, 
235  ;  joins  Edward  de  Brus  in 
Ireland,  239  ;  campaign  in 
Ireland,  240-244  ;  first  battle 
in  Ireland,  ib.;  incident  of 
kindness  of  heart  in,  242  ;  re¬ 
turns  from  Ireland,  244  ;  Pope 
John  XXII.  threatens,  with  ex- 
communication,  251  ;  personal 
appearance  of,  described  by  the 
Pope’s  legates,  ib.;  invasion  of 
England  by,  269  ;  treats  with 
Edward  II.  for  peace,  270  ; 
again  excommunicated,  271  ; 
masterly  tactics  before  English 
invasion,  281  ;  another  invasion 
of  England  by,  282  ;  defeats 
Edward  II.  at  Biland,  283  ; 
reply  to  terms  of  peace  by 
Edward  II.,  292  ;  birth  of 


374 


Index. 


Bruce  ( Continued ). 

Prince  David,  296  ;  stricken 
with  disease,  298  ;  holds  a 
Parliament  at  Scone,  298  ; 
sets  about  defence  of  the  High¬ 
lands,  299  ;  builds  a  castle  on 
Cantyre,  300  ;  engages  in 
country  pursuits,  301  ;  chooses 
a  residence  in  the  Lennox,  ib .; 
love  of  the  sea  by,  302  ;  hospi¬ 
tality  of,  ib.;  renounces  the 
truce  with  England,  307  ;  in¬ 
vades  Ireland  a  second  time, 
319  ;  promised  plenary  absolu¬ 
tion  from  the  Pope,  334  ;  ill¬ 
ness  of,  337  ;  visits  Galloway, 
ib.;  final  instructions  by,  338  ; 
commissions  Douglas  to  carry 
his  heart  to  the  Holy  Land,  ib.; 
death  of,  340 ;  buried  at  Dun¬ 
fermline,  341  ;  how  his  memory 
has  been  cherished,  343  ; 
character  of,  343-353  ;  earlier 
career  of,  343  ;  Wallace  and, 
344  ;  the  assassination  of 
Comyn,  345  ;  courage  and 
sagacity  as  King,  ib.;  Randolph 
Moray  and,  ib .,  346  ;  humane¬ 
ness  of,  ib.;  as  a  civil  ruler,  34 7 ; 
no  adequate  portrait  of,  352  ; 
high  rank  as  a  military  com¬ 
mander,  353  ;  children  of,  354 

Brus,  Alexander  de,  defeat  and 
death  of,  149 

Brus,  Edward  de,  first  mention 
of,  116  ;  gains  a  victory  over 
the  English  in  Galloway,  183  ; 
harries  the  English  Border, 
189  ;  captures  Rutherglen  and 
Dundee,  196  ;  lays  siege  to 
Stirling  Castle,  197  ;  command 
at  Bannockburn  of,  201  ; 
division  of,  bears  the  brunt  of 
the  battle  at  Bannockburn, 
217;  created  Earl  of  Carrick, 
226  ;  invades  North  Cumber¬ 
land,  ib.;  campaign  in  Ireland 
of,  236-244  ;  defeats  the  Earl 
of  Ulster  at  Conyers,  ib.;  lays 
siege  to  Carrickfergus,  ib.,  238  ; 


defeats  the  English  at  Arscoll, 
ib.;  returns  to  Ulster,  237  ; 
crowned  King  of  Ireland,  238  ; 
asks  Bruce  to  join  him  in  Ire¬ 
land,  239  ;  death  of,  259 
Brus,  Marie  de,  imprisoned  by 
order  of  Edward  II.,  139 
Brus,  Nigel  de,  capture  and 
death  of,  139 

Brus,  Robert  de,  first  Lord  of 
Annandale,  18  ;  a  friend  of 
David  I. ,  ib.;  speech  attributed 
to,  before  the  battle  of  the 
Standard,  30  ;  joins  Stephen 
against  David  I.,  ib. 

Brus,  Robert  de,  second  Lord  of 
Annandale,  19 

Brus,  Robert  de,  third  Lord  of 
Annandale,  20 

Brus,  Robert  de,  fifth  Lord  of 
Annandale,  20 

Brus,  Robert  de,  the  Competitor, 
sixth  Lord  of  Annandale,  20  ; 
designated  heir  to  the  Scottish 
throne  by  Alexander  II.,  41  ; 
attempt  to  seize  the  kingdom 
for,  ib.;  a  claimant  to  the 
Scottish  throne,  56 
Brus,  Robert  de,  “  le  viel,”  sev¬ 
enth  Lord  of  Annandale,  21  ; 
romantic  marriage  of,  ib.; 
character  of,  77  ;  Governor  of 
Carlisle,  85  ;  asked  to  resign  by 
Edward  I.,  93  ;  death  of,  114 
Brus,  Robert  de,  eighth  Lord  of 
Annandale,  see  Bruce,  Robert 
Brus,  Thomas  de,  and  the  death 
of  John  Comyn,  129  ;  defeat 
and  death  of,  149 
Brus,  William  de,  Lord  of  Brem- 
ber,  18 

Brus,  William  de,  fourth  Lord  of 
Annandale,  20 

Buchan,  Countess  of,  crowns 
Bruce  at  Scone,  131  ;  im¬ 
prisoned  by  order  of  Edward 

II.,  139 

Buchan,  Earl  of,  see  Beaumont 
Burghs,  Scottish,  wise  policy  of 
the  kings  regarding,  349 


Index. 


375 


c 

Caerlaverock,  siege  of,  by  Ed¬ 
ward  I.,  106 

Caerlaverock ,  The  Roll  of,  105  ; 
description  of  army  of  Ed¬ 
ward  I.  in,  ih. 

Caithness,  Bishop  of,  appointed 
Chancellor  of  Scotland,  60 
Cambuskenneth  Abbey,  Bruce’s 
compact  with  the  Bishop  of 
St.  Andrews  at,  120 
Cambuskenneth,  Parliament  at, 
303 

Campbell,  Sir  Colin,  chastised 
by  Bruce  for  breach  of  dis¬ 
cipline,  240 

Campbell,  Sir  Nigel,  appointed 
a  commissioner  by  Bruce  to 
treat  for  peace  with  Edward 
II.,  227 

Cantyre,  Bruce  builds  a  castle  on, 
300 

Cardross,  Bruce’s  residence  at, 
301,  302 

Carlisle,  Earl  of,  see  Harcla 
Carlisle,  Robert  de  Brus,  “  le 
viel,”  appointed  Governor  of, 
72  ;  siege  of,  94,  99,  23x  5 
muster  of  the  English  army  at, 

io5 

Carrick,  Earl  of,  see  Bruce 
Carrickfergus,  siege  of,  238 
Chronica  Gentis  Scotoruin ,  see 
Scotichronicon 

Clackmannan  Castle,  Bruce  s  resi¬ 
dence  at,  193 

Clare,  Richard  de,  English  com¬ 
mander  in  Ireland,  244 
Clifford,  Sir  Robert  de,  campaign 
against  Wallace  by,  85  >  aP- 
pointed  a  Guardian  of  Scot¬ 
land,  186  ;  at  the  battle  of  Ban¬ 
nockburn,  206 

Clomnacnoise ,  Annals  of,  230- 
238 

Clydesdale,  Wallace  in,  85 
Coal,  as  English  payment  ot 
ransom,  274,  297 
Coinage,  Scottish,  35 1 


Comyn,  John,  influence  of,  as  a 
Guardian  of  Scotland,  50 ; 
claim  to  the  Scottish  throne 
advanced  by,  58  ;  quarrels 
with  Bruce,  102  ;  appointed  a 
Guardian  of  Scotland,  de¬ 
feats  English  troops  at  Roslyn, 
112  ;  surrenders  to  England, 
ih.;  sent  into  exile,  113  ;  sen¬ 
tence  of  exile  conditionally 
remitted,  116;  assassinated  by 
Bruce,  126  ;  cause  of  the  quar¬ 
rel  between  Bruce  and,  127 
Conyers,  battle  of,  236. 

Corbridge  burnt  by  the  Earl  of 
Buchan,  72 

Cornwall,  Earl  of,  see  Gaveston 
Coronation  Stone,  of  Scotland, 
removal  of,  by  Edward  I.,  79 
Crab,  John,  Scottish  engineer  at 
the  siege  of  Berwick,  266 
Craigencallie,  Bruce  at,  157 
Cressingham,  Sir  Hugh  de,  ap¬ 
pointed  Treasurer  of  Scotland, 
82  ;  defeated  by  Wallace  at 
Stirling  Bridge,  92 ;  death  of,  ih. 
Cullen,  death  of  Bruce’s  queen 
at,  330 

Cumberland,  considered  a  part 
of  Scotland,  93  ;  raids  by  the 

Scots  in,  99  . 

Cumbria,  the  ancient  British 
kingdom  of,  24 

Customs  of  the  Scots  and  Brets, 
forbidden  by  Parliament,  123 

D 

Dairy,  defeat  of  Bruce  at,  138 
David  I.,  youth  of,  26  ;  feudal 
government  of,  ih.,  27  ;  invas¬ 
ion  of  England  by,  29  ;  battle 
of  the  Standard,  31  ;  death  of, 
ih.;  ardour  for  Scottish  inde¬ 
pendence  of,  34 

David  II.,  birth  of,  296;  mar¬ 
riage  to  Princess  Johanna  of 
England,  33i“334  I  crowned 
at  Scone,  366 


Index 


37  6 


Despenser,  Sir  Hugh  le,  with 
Edward  II.  at  Bannockburn, 
215  ;  English  commissioner  at 
York,  297 

Devorguila,  mother  of  John  de 
Ballicl,  62 

Dirleton  Castle,  captured  by  the 
Bishop  of  Durham,  95 

“  Douglas  Larder,”  the,  150 

Douglas,  Sir  James,  at  the  battle 
of  Methven,  135  ;  wounded  at 
the  battle  of  Dairy,  138  ;  capt¬ 
ures  Brodick  Castle,  146  ;  the 
“Douglas  Larder,”  150;  de¬ 
feats  Sir  John  de  Moubray 
near  Kilmarnock,  163  ;  curious 
letter  concerning,  165  ;  re-capt¬ 
ures  his  own  castle,  174  ;  suc¬ 
cess  in  Tweeddale  of,  180  ; 
with  Bruce  in  Argyll,  184  ; 
captures  Roxburgh  Castle,  194  ; 
command  of,  at  Bannockburn, 
201;  magnanimous  bravery  of , 
at  Bannockburn,  208  ;  created 
a  knight  banneret,  213  ;  makes 
a  raid  through  Durham,  231  ; 
attack  on  Berwick  by  Bruce 
and,  233  ;  victory  at  Scaith- 
moor,  by,  234,  235  ;  joint 
Guardian  of  Scotland  during 
Bruce’s  absence  in  Ireland, 
239 ;  victory  of  Lintalee  by, 
247  ;  combat  between  de  Ne¬ 
ville  and,  248  ;  treaty  between 
the  Earl  of  Lancaster  and,  279 ; 
invades  England,  308  ;  gen¬ 
erous  rivalry  between  Moray 
and,  312  ;  assault  on  the  Eng¬ 
lish  camp  by,  315  ;  receives 
back  his  English  property  from 
Edward  III.,  327  ;  Bruce  com¬ 
missions,  to  carry  his  heart 
to  the  Holy  Land,  338  ;  prob¬ 
able  descent  of,  347  ;  Bruce’s 
last  wishes  regarding  the  duties 
of  Moray  and,  357  ;  receives 
letters  of  protection  from  Ed¬ 
ward  III,  on  his  mission  to  the 
Holy  Land,  358  ;  reaches  Se¬ 
ville,  360  ;  takes  part  in  a  bat¬ 


tle  against  the  Saracens,  361  ; 
death  of,  ib.;  buried  at  Dou¬ 
glas,  362  ;  Barbour’s  descrip¬ 
tion  of,  364  ;  relics  of,  365 
Douglas,  Sir  William  de,  a  Scot¬ 
tish  leader,  86  ;  surrenders  to 
the  English  at  Irvine,  87  ;  im¬ 
prisoned  at  Berwick,  89 
Dryburgh  Abbey,  the  burning 
of,  282 

Dublin,  defence  of,  241 
Dumfries,  treaty  between  Eng¬ 
land  and  Scotland  concluded 
at,  108;  Bruce  slays  Comyn  in 
the  Greyfriars  Church  at,  130  ; 
Edward  II.  at,  173  ;  Bruce 
captures,  191 

Dunaverty  Castle,  Bruce  at, 

x43 

Dunbar,  Patrick  de,  Earl  of 
March,  a  claimant  to  the  Scot¬ 
tish  throne,  56  ;  appointed 
captain  of  the  English  forces 
in  Scotland,  99  ;  urged  by  Ed¬ 
ward  I.  to  proceed  against 
Wallace,  113  ;  gives  shelter  to 
Edward  II.  after  Bannock¬ 
burn,  222  ;  joins  the  Scottish 
national  party,  239 
Dunbarton  Castle,  Parliament  at 
Westminster  makes  provision 
for  the  safe  custody  of,  123 
Dunblane,  churches  at,  stripped 
of  lead  by  Edward  I.  for  war 
material,  114 

Dundalk,  the  storming  of,  236 
Dundee,  story  of  Wallace  at,  83  ; 
surrender  to  Wallace  of  the 
castle  of,  93 

Dunfermline,  birth  of  David  II. 
at,  296  ;  Bruce  buried  at,  341  ; 
a  burial-place  of  Scottish  kings, 
342  ;  destruction  of  the  abbey 
at,  ib. 

Dunkeld,  Bishop  of,  see  Sin¬ 
clair 

Dunstaffnage,  capture  of,  1S5 
Durham,  Bishop  of,  see  Beck 
Durham,  Douglas  makes  a  raid 
through,  231 


Index. 


377 


E 

Eadgar  Aetheling,  seeks  refuge 
at  the  Scottish  Court,  24 

Earldom,  valueofan,in  Norman 
days,  26 

Edinburgh,  the  English  army  at, 
200  ;  sack  of  Holyrood,  282  ; 
Parliament  at,  328,  335 

Edinburgh  Castle,  Parliament  at 
Westminster  makes  provision 
for  the  safe  custody  of,  123  ; 
siege  of,  by  Randolph  Moray, 

I95 

Edward  I.,  directions  by,  as  to 
the  marriage  between  his  son 
and  Princess  Margaret,  44  ; 
letter  from,  to  the  Bishop 
of  St.  Andrews,  47  ;  request 
from  the  Scottish  Guardians 
to,  53  ;  conference  with  Scot¬ 
tish  nobles  at  Norham,  55 
collects  records  of  homage  of 
Scottish  kings,  56  ;  judgment 
regarding  the  claims  of  Bruce 
and  de  Balliol,  64  ;  commands 
John  de  Balliol  to  join  him  in 
London,  70  ;  prepares  for  war 
against  Scotland,  71  ;  receives 
homage  of  Scottish  barons,  ib.; 
makes  a  progress  through  Scot¬ 
land,  75,  79  ;  Wallace  and,  79; 
removes  the  Coronation  Stone 
from  Scone  to  Westminster, 
79  ;  invades  Scotland,  95  > 
fights  the  battle  of  Falkirk, 
96,  98  ;  instance  of  the  cruelty 
of,  100  ;  prepares  for  a  great 
expedition  into  Scotland,  104  ; 
Pope  Boniface  opposes  the 
claim  to  Scotland  of,  108  , 
keen  pursuit  of  Wallace  by, 
1 13  ;  holds  a  Parliament  at  St. 
Andrews,  ib.?-  lays  siege  to 
Stirling  Castle,  120;  scheme 
of,  for  the  government  of 
Scotland,  122  ;  summons  Scot¬ 
tish  commissioners  to  a  Parlia¬ 
ment  at  Westminster,  ib.;  al¬ 
leged  design  against  the  life  of 


Bruce  by,  128  ;  favour  shown 
toward  Bruce  by,  ib.;  hears  of 
the  assassination  of  Comyn, 
132  ;  orders  a  campaign  in 
Scotland,  133  ;  letters  from, 
to  Ay mer  de  Valence,  ib 134, 
142  ;  sufferings  from  dysentery 
of,  135  ;  orders  Bruce’s  sister 
and  daughter  to  be  imprisoned 
in  “  cages,”  139  ;  lays  a  charge 
against  Scottish  prelates  before 
the  Pope,  141  ;  fury  of,  at  de¬ 
feat  of  Loudon  Hill,  165 ; 
probability  of  ultimate  triumph 
over  Scotland  of,  166  ;  death 
of,  167  ;  dying  injunctions  of, 
to  the  Prince  of  Wales,  ib.  ; 
legend  on  the  tomb  of,  ib.; 
character  of,  ib .,  168 
Edward  II.,  irresolute  spirit  of, 
173  ;  invades  Scotland,  187  ; 
route  into  Scotland  of,  ib.;  at 
the  battle  of  Bannockburn, 
213  ;  contempt  for  the  Scottish 
army  at  Bannockburn  by,  215 
headstrong  conduct  at  Ban¬ 
nockburn  of,  ib.;  flight  from 
the  field  of  Bannockburn, 
221  ;  founds  Oriel  College, 
Oxford,  223  ;  assembles  a  Par¬ 
liament  at  York,  226  ;  letters 
from  Bruce  to,  expressing  a 
desire  for  peace,  227  ;  intrigues 
of,  with  Scottish  barons,  261 ; 
prepares  to  capture  Berwick, 
265  ;  sues  for  peace,  270  ; 
adopts  secret  measures  to  win 
over  the  Scots,  278  ;  boasts 
that  he  will  establish  peace  by 
force  of  arms,  280;  invades 
Scotland  a  second  time,  281  ; 
disgust  among  his  followers  for, 
289  ;  renews  proposals  for 
peace,  291 ;  complaints  as  to 
the  Pope’s  recognition  of  Bruce 
as  King  of  Scotland,  295  ; 
commands  Edward  de  Balliol 
to  return  to  England,  297  ; 
abdication  of,  305 
Edward  III.,  succeeds  to  the 


37§ 


Index. 


throne,  305  ;  confirms  the  truce 
made  by  his  father,  306  ;  com¬ 
mands  an  army  against  the 
Scots,  310 ;  proclamation  of, 
during  campaign  against  the 
Scots,  31 1  ;  failure  of  Scottish 
campaign  of,  318  ;  issues  letters 
of  protection  to  Douglas  on 
his  mission  to  the  Holy  Land, 
359 

Elgin,  Edward  I.  at,  79 
Elizabeth,  wife  of  Bruce,  death 
of,  329 ;  incidents  in  the  life 
of,  330 

Eric,  King  of  Norway,  negotia¬ 
tions  between  Edward  I.  as  to 
the  marriage  between  Princess 
Margaret  and  Prince  Edward, 
42 ;  sends  plenipotentiaries  to 
England  to  confer  as  to  the 
succession  of  Princess  Mar¬ 
garet,  ib.;  claim  to  the  Scottish 
succession  by,  58 
Exchequer  Rolls,  evidence  re¬ 
garding  Bruce’s  work  in  the, 
299 

F 

Fabyan,  story  of  Bruce’s  sojourn 
in  Norway  by,  145 
Falaise,  treaty  of,  56 
Falkirk,  battle  of,  96-98 
Fife,  English  invaders  in,  251 
Flanders,  expedition  by  Edward 
I.  to,  89 

Flemings,  encouraged  to  settle 
in  Scotland,  349 

Flemish  merchants,  gallant  de¬ 
fence  of  Berwick  by,  74 
Feeder  a  Angelic  ana,  Rymer’s, 
13 

Folk-lore,  the  spider  in,  15 
Fordun,  John  of,  the  Scolichroni- 
con  by,  8  ;  remark  on  claimants 
to  the  Scottish  throne  by,  50 ; 
opinion  of,  as  to  settlement  of 
the  Scottish  succession,  65  ; 
account  by,  of  a  plot  against 
Bruce,  275 


Forfar,  captured  by  Bruce,  190 
France,  collections  of  public 
treaties  printed  in,  12 
Fraser,  Sir  Simon,  joins  the  Scot¬ 
tish  national  party,  ill  ;  sent 
into  exile,  124 ;  execution  of, 
140 

Fraser,  William,  Bishop  of  St. 
Andrews,  letter  to  Edward  I. 
from,  47  ;  policy  of,  as  to  the 
Scottish  succession,  50,  51 
Free  trade,  policy  of,  in  Scotland, 
350 

French  knights  in  the  English 
army,  285 

Froissart,  historical  point  of  view 
of,  2  ;  story  as  to  the  last  wishes 
of  Edward  I.,  167  ;  description 
of  Scottish  cavalry  by,  308  ;  on 
the  death  of  Bruce,  338,  339 
Furness,  the  Scots  at,  235 

G 

Gael,  ancient  contempt  for  the 
Saxon  by  the,  28 
Galloway,  struggle  for  independ¬ 
ence  of,  31  ;  uncultivated  state 
of  Crown  lands  in,  40 ;  the 
English  in,  107  ;  raid  of  Bruce 
in,  173  ;  Edward  de  Brus  in, 
183  ;  an  Act  concerning,  351 
Galythly,  Patrick,  claim  to  the 
Scottish  throne  by,  58 
Gascons,  fight  between  the  Scots 
and,  234 

Gaveston,  Piers,  Earl  of  Corn¬ 
wall,  honours  bestowed  upon, 
by  Edward  II.,  173,  180  ; 

Warden  of  Scotland  north  of 
the  Forth,  188  ;  sentenced  to 
perpetual  exile,  ib.;  death  of, 
197 

Glasgow,  Bishop  of,  see  Wischard 
Glentrool,  adventures  of  Bruce  in, 
157 

Gloucester,  Earl  of,  speech  to 
Edward  I.  by,  regarding  the 
Scottish  succession,  65  ;  coun¬ 
sels  flight  of  Bruce  from  Eng- 


Index. 


379 


land,  128  ;  appointed  Captain- 
General  of  the  English  forces 
in  Scotland,  187  ;  at  the  battle 
of  Bannockburn,  206  et  seq.; 
death  of,  219 

Gray,  Sir  Thomas  (senior),  war¬ 
like  distinction  of,  4  ;  taken 
prisoner  at  the  battle  of  Ban¬ 
nockburn,  208 

Gray,  Sir  Thomas,  authorship  of 
the  Scalacronica,  5  ;  warlike 
experiences  of,  ib .;  narration 
of  Bruce’s  flight  from  England, 
129  ;  story  of  the  assassination 
of  Comyn,  ib. 

Great  Britain,  the  printing  of 
public  treaties  in,  12 

Guacelin,  Cardinal,  sent  to  ex¬ 
communicate  Bruce,  251 

Guardians,  Scottish,  six  ap¬ 
pointed,  39  ;  number  of,  re¬ 
duced  to  four,  41  ;  meeting  of 
the,  with  Edward  I.  and  Eric 
of  Norway,  42  ;  dissensions  be¬ 
tween  the,  50 ;  besiege  Stir¬ 
ling  Castle,  104 

H 

Haco,  King  of  Norway,  defeat 
of,  33 

Hailes,  Lord,  deceived  by  Bar¬ 
bour’s  inaccuracies,  7  ;  the 
Annals  by,  13  ;  praiseworthy 
historical  researches  of,  ib.; 
Sir  Walter  Scott  on,  ib.;  re¬ 
marks  on  the  conferences  be¬ 
tween  Scottish  nobles  and 
Edward  I.,  60  ;  opinion  of, 
regarding  Bruce’s  claim  to  the 
Scottish  throne,  66  ;  on  the 
letter  of  the  cardinals  to  the 
Pope,  regarding  Bruce,  251- 
252  ;  on  the  terms  of  peace  be¬ 
tween  Bruce  and  Edward  II., 
254  ;  on  summary  of  provisions 
of  English  Parliament  at 
Northampton,  324,  325 
Haliburton,  Ralf  de,  betrayer  of 
Wallace,  117 


Harcla,  Sir  Andrew  de,  gallant 
defence  of  Carlisle  by,  231  ; 
makes  an  agreement  with  Bruce, 
287  ;  arrested  by  Edward  II., 

289  ;  trial  of,  ib.;  execution  of, 

290 

Hardy,  Sir  T.  D.,  historical  la¬ 
bours  of,  3 

Harry,  Blind,  inaccuracy  of  the 
poem  on  Wallace  by,  82,  84 
Hartlepool,  messengers  to  King 
Eric  of  Norway  sail  from,  46  ; 
Douglas  occupies,  231  ;  in  ter¬ 
ror  of  the  Scots,  258 
Hastings,  Sir  John  de,  a  claimant 
to  the  Scottish  throne,  56 
Haye,  Sir  Gilbert  de  la,  de¬ 
nounced  a  traitor  by  Edward 
I.,  134  ;  appointed  a  commis¬ 
sioner  by  Bruce  to  treat  for 
peace  with  Edward  II.,  227 
Hemingburgh,  Walter  of,  value  of 
the  writings  of,  3  ;  on  Bruce’s 
relations  with  Wallace,  85 ; 
graphic  description  of  the  bat¬ 
tle  of  Falkirk  by,  96 
Heraldry  in  the  time  of  Edward 
!•»  105 

Hertford,  imprisonment  ot  de 
Balliol  at,  78 

Hexham,  burnt  by  the  Scots,  72  ; 
curious  protection  granted  to, 

94 

Highlanders,  bravery  of,  at  the 
battle  of  Biland,  284 
Highlands,  free  from  the  Eng¬ 
lish,  104  ;  Bruce’s  plans  for 
defence  of  the,  299 
Holinshed,  description  of  the 
English  soldiers  by,  309 
Holland,  Count  of,  a  claimant 
to  the  Scottish  throne,  56 
Holyrood,  sack  of,  282 
Homage,  claim  by  Henry  III. 
for,  from  Scotland,  35  '»  in_ 
stances  of,  done  by  Kings  of 
Scotland  to  those  of  England, 
commanded  to  be  read  by  Ed¬ 
ward  I.  at  a  conference  at 
Norham,  56  ;  done  by  de  Bal- 


38° 


Index. 


liol,  68  ;  done  by  James  the 
Steward,  142 

Hume,  David,  silence  of,  regard¬ 
ing  Bruce’s  claim  to  the  Scot¬ 
tish  throne,  66 

Hume,  of  Godscroft,  anecdote  of 
Sir  James  Douglas  by,  16 
Huntingdon,  David  I.  and  the 
earldom  of,  31 

I 

Inchaffray,  Abbot  of,  at  the  bat¬ 
tle  of  Bannockburn,  213 
Inchcolm,  Abbot  of,  see  Bower 
Ingibiorg,  Princess,  marriage  to 
Malcolm  Canmore  of,  24 
Innes,  Cosmo,  edition  of  Bar¬ 
bour’s  Brus  by,  6 
Ireland,  Edward  I.  collects  sup¬ 
plies  in,  105  ;  campaign  of 
Edward  de  Brus  in,  236-244  ; 
famine  in,  237  ;  Bruce  arrives 
in,  239;  Bruce’s  march  through, 
z'A-244  ;  supposed  second  ex¬ 
pedition  of  Bruce  into,  319 
Irvine,  surrendered  to  the  Eng¬ 
lish,  87 

Itchenstoke,  Edward  I.  hears  of 
the  coronation  of  Bruce  at,  132 

J 

Jedburgh  Castle,  Parliament  at 
Westminster  makes  provision 
for  the  safe  custody  of,  123 
Jed  worth  Forest,  English  at¬ 
tempt  to  level,  247 
Justiciaries,  appointment  of,  in 
Scotland,  123 

K 

Keith,  Sir  Robert  de,  appointed 
warden  of  Selkirk  Forest,  102  ; 
leads  a  cavalry  charge  at  Ban¬ 
nockburn,  217  ;  appointed  a 
commissioner  to  treat  for  peace 
with  Edward  II,  227 
Kenlis,  battle  of,  236 


Kildrummie  Castle,  Parliament 
at  Westminster  orders,  into  the 
responsible  keeping  of  the  Earl 
of  Carrick,  124  ;  captured  by 
the  English,  131 
Kinghorn,  death  of  Alexander 
III.  at,  36 

Kirkpatrick,  with  Bruce  at  the 
assassination  of  Comyn,  130 
Kirkpatrick,  Sir  Roger  de,  ap¬ 
pointed  a  commissioner  to  treat 
for  peace  with  Edward  II., 
227 

L 

Laing,  Dr.  David,  opinion  of,  as 
to  the  historical  accuracy  of 
Boece  and  Buchanan,  12 
Lamberton,  William  de,  Bishop 
of  St.  Andrews,  appointed  a 
Guardian  of  Scotland,  102  ; 
deputed  by  Edward  II.  to  use 
his  influence  to  bring  the  Scots 
to  terms,  188  ;  excommuni¬ 
cated,  272  ;  represents  Scot¬ 
land  in  the  negotiations  for 
peace  at  York,  296  ;  warlike 
spirit  of,  326  ;  death  of,  335 
Lanark,  Wallace  slays  the  sheriff 
of,  85 

Lancaster,  Earl  of,  appointed 
Guardian  of  Scotland,  246  ; 
treaty  between  Douglas  and, 
279 

Lanercost,  Chronicle  of ,  charac¬ 
teristics  of  the,  4  ;  where  com¬ 
piled,  ib.  ;  evidence  regarding 
the  history  of  the,  ib.  ;  on  the 
Scottish  rebellion  at  the  time 
of  Wallace,  84  ;  on  the  execu¬ 
tion  of  de  Harcla,  290  ;  on  the 
truce  between  Bruce  and  Ed¬ 
ward  II.,  306;  on  the  treaty 
between  Bruce  and  Edward 
III.,  324  ;  on  the  Scottish 
Coronation  Stone,  328 
Largs,  battle  of,  33 
Leinster,  incident  in  Bruce’s  in¬ 
vasion  near,  240 


Index. 


381 


Lennox,  Earl  of,  devotion  to  the 
cause  of  Bruce  by,  144  >  Bruce 
exchanges  certain  lands  with, 
301 

Letter  from  Scottish  laymen  to 
Pope  John  XXII.,  272-274 
Lincoln,  reply  by  Edward  I.  to 
Pope  Boniface  drawn  up  at, 
108  ;  English  Parliament  at, 
321 

Lindsay,  Sir  Alexander  de,  sent 
into  exile,  124 

Linlithgow  Castle,  Parliament  at 
Westminster  makes  provision 
for  the  safe  custody  of,  123  ; 
siege  of,  192 
Lintalee,  battle  of,  247 
Livingston,  Andrew  de,  sheriff 
of  Lanark,  slain  by  Wallace,  85 
Lochmaben  Castle,  handed  ovei 
by  Edward  I.  to  the  Earl  of 
Buchan,  77  ;  imprisonment  of 
Scottish  hostages  in,  100  ;  siege 
of,  by  Bruce,  102  ;  forfeited 
to  England,  133  ;  captured  by 
the  English,  139 
Lomond,  Loch,  Bruce’s  retreat 
on  an  island  in,  145 
London,  de  Balliol  summoned 
by  Edward  I.  to,  70  ;  trial  of 
Wallace  in,  11S 

Lorn,  John  of,  opposition  to 
Bruce  by,  152-156 ;  captures 
the  Isle  of  Man  from  the  Scots, 
245 

Lothian,  the  prey  of  rival  Saxon 
chiefs,  23 

Loudon  Hill,  battle  of,  165 
Luke,  Cardinal,  sent  to  excom¬ 
municate  Bruce,  251 
Lumphannan,  battle  of,  247 
Lundin,  Sir  Richard  de,  deserts 
the  Scottish  rebels,  86  ;  ad¬ 
vises  Surrey  at  the  battle  of 
Stirling,  91 

M 

MacAlpin,  Kenneth,  the  Scot¬ 
tish  kingdom  of,  22 


Macandrosser,  attack  on  Bruce 
by  the,  138 

Macbeth  is  defeated  by  Malcolm 
Canmore,  23 

Macdouall,  Sir  Dougal,  defeats 
the  brothers  of  Bruce,  149 ; 
in  command  of  Dumfries  Cas¬ 
tle,  19 1  ;  death  of,  318 
Macdoualls,  defeat  of  the,  by 
Edward  de  Brus,  184 
Macduffs,  hereditary  privilege 
of  the,  131 

MacEth,  Wimund,  Celtic  rising 
under,  29 

Maid  of  Norway,  see  Margaret, 
Princess 

Maitland  Club,  edition  of.  the 
Chronicle  of  Lanercost  printed 
for  the,  4 

Malcolm  Canmore,  defeat  of 
Macbeth  by,  23  ;  diplomatic 
policy  of,  24 

Mandeville,  Roger  de,  a  claim¬ 
ant  to  the  Scottish  throne,  58 
Mar  (Donald),  Earl  of,  with 
Bruce  in  Weardale,  3 10  >  suc¬ 
ceeds  Moray  as  Regent, 
370 

Mar,  Earl  of,  favours  the  cause 
of  Bruce,  76 

March,  Earl  of,  see  Dunbar, 
Patrick  de 

Margaret,  Princess,  marriage  to 
Alexander  III.  of,  34 
Margaret,  Princess,  the  Maid  of 
Norway,  proposed  marriage  to 
Prince  Edward  of,  42  !  lavish 
expenditure  by  Edward  I.  on 
behalf  of,  46  ;  story  that  she 
had  been  kidnapped,  49  an 
impostor  calling  herself,  ib.  ; 
death  of,  ib. 

Marjorie,  Princess,  imprisoned 
by  order  of  Edward  II.,  139 
Marmion,  Sir  William,  adven¬ 
ture  of,  263 

Matilda,  Princess,  married  to 
Henry  I.,  26 

Mauley,  Sir  Edmund  de,  death 
of,  at  Bannockburn,  220 


3§  2 


Index. 


Maxwell,  Sir  John  de,  entertains 
Wallace,  104 

Melrose,  proposed  interview 
between  English  commission¬ 
ers  and  Bruce  near,  188 
Melrose  Abbey,  sack  of,  252  ; 
plan  for  restoration  of,  298  ; 
Bruce’s  heart  buried  in,  362 
Melton,  Archbishop,  English 
force  led  by,  269 ;  warlike 
spirit  of,  326 

Menteith,  Sir  John  de,  supposed 
betrayal  of  Wallace  by,  1 1 7  ; 
joins  Bruce,  186 

Menteith,  Murdoch  de,  plot 
against  Bruce  by,  275 
Merlin,  prophecy  of,  172 
Methven,  battle  of,  135 
Monthermer,  Sir  Ralph  de,  Bruce 
defeats,  166  ;  released  uncon¬ 
ditionally  by  Bruce  after  Ban¬ 
nockburn,  224 

Moray,  Sir  Andrew  de,  colleague 
of  Wallace,  84  ;  lays  siege  to 
Urquhart  Castle,  90 
Moray,  Earl  of,  see  Moray, 
Randolph 

Moray,  Sir  John  de,  taken  pris¬ 
oner  by  the  English  at  Carlisle, 
232 

Moray,  Randolph,  taken  prisoner 
at  Methven,  135  ;  pardoned 
by  Edward  I.,  142;  taken 
prisoner  by  Douglas,  181  ; 
reason  of  his  opposition  to 
Bruce,  182  ;  blockades  Edin¬ 
burgh  Castle,  195  ;  command 
at  Bannockburn  of,  201  ;  brav¬ 
ery  of,  at  Bannockburn,  206- 
209  ;  with  Edward  de  Brus  in 
Ireland,  229,  237,  239;  ap¬ 
pointed  joint  Guardian  of  Scot¬ 
land  by  Bruce,  ib. ;  with 
Bruce  at  the  battle  of  Biland, 
283  ;  goes  on  an  embassy  to 
the  Pope,  293  ;  reasons  urged 
to  the  Pope  for  recognition  of 
Bruce  as  King  of  Scotland, 
^.,294;  successful  diplomacy 
of,  295  ;  represents  Scotland 


in  negotiations  for  peace  at 
York,  296;  goes  to  France  to 
arrange  treaty  with  King 
Charles,  303  ;  invades  Eng¬ 
land,  308  ;  generous  rivalry 
between  Douglas  and,  312  ;  ap¬ 
pointed  Regent  after  the  death 
of  Bruce,  358  ;  death  of,  369  ; 
personal  appearance  of,  370 

Moray,  Thomas,  see  Moray, 
Randolph 

More,  Sir  Thomas  de  la,  the 
chronicle  by,  2 

Mortimer,  Earl  of,  charged  with 
treachery,  318  ;  treaty  of  North¬ 
ampton  the  work  of,  367 

Moubray,  Sir  John  de,  defeated 
by  Douglas,  163 

Moubray,  Sir  Philip  de,  unhorses 
Bruce  at  Methven,  135  ;  coun¬ 
sels  Edward  I.  at  Bannockburn, 
204 ;  delivers  up  Stirling  Cas¬ 
tle  to  Bruce,  224 ;  enters  the 
service  of  Bruce,  ib.  ;  with 
Edward  de  Brus  in  Ireland,  229 

My  ton,  the  Chapter  of,  269 

N 

Newcastle,  Balliol  does  homage 
to  Edward  I.  at,  68  ;  execution 
of  Scottish  prisoners  at,  141  ; 
muster  of  an  English  army  at, 
246,  265,  307 

Norham,  conference  between 
Edward  I.  and  Scottish  nobles 
at,  55  I  the  scene  of  many 
exploits,  263 

Norman-French  spoken  in  Scot¬ 
land,  34 

Norsemen,  districts  of  Scotland 
occupied  by,  23 

Northampton,  deliberations  at, 
regarding  peace  between  Eng¬ 
land  and  Scotland,  324 

Northumberland,  considered  a 
part  of  Scotland,  32  ;  overrun 
by  Wallace,  93  ;  invaded  by 
Edward  de  Brus,  226  ;  a  Scot¬ 
tish  army  invades,  257 


Index. 


o 

O’Connor,  Eth,  chief  of  Con¬ 
naught,  invoked  as  an  auxiliary 
by  Edward  I.,  198 
Oliphant,  Sir  William  de,  de¬ 
fends  Stirling  Castle,  115 
O’Neills,  crown  of  Ireland  offered 
to  Edward  de  Brus  by  the,  228 
Oriel  College,  Oxford,  Edward 
I.  and  the  founding  of,  223 
Orkney,  death  of  the  Maid  of 
Norway  at,  49 

Ormesby,  Sir  William  de,  ap¬ 
pointed  Justiciar  of  Scotland, 
82 

Overlord  of  Scotland,  Edward  I. 
assumes  the  title  of,  60,  69,  70 

P 

Pembroke,  Earl  of,  see  Valence 
Percy,  Sir  Henry  de,  knighted  at 
the  sack  of  Berwick,  73  ;  en¬ 
counters  Wallace  in  Ayrshire, 
84  ;  campaign  against  Wallace 
by  85 ;  created  Earl  of  Car- 
rick  instead  of  Bruce,  133  ;  ap¬ 
pointed  Warden  of  Scotland 
north  of  the  Forth,  188 
Perth,  churches  of,  stripped  of 
lead  by  Edward  I.  for  war  ma¬ 
terial,  1 14;  Bruce  captures,  191 
Philip,  King  of  France,  secret 
treaty  between  de  Balliol  and, 
71  ;  Wallace  seeks  the  assist¬ 
ance  of,  103  ;  attempts  an  alli¬ 
ance  with  the  Scots,  ib.  j  se¬ 
cures  a  truce  between  England 
and  Scotland,  108 
Picardy,  de  Balliol  in,  79 
Piets,  ancient  territory  of  the,  22 
Pinkeny,  Robert  de,  a  claimant 
to  the  Scottish  throne,  57 
Placita  Roll,  account  of  the  in¬ 
vasion  of  Scotland  by  Edward 
I.  in  the,  78 

Pope  Boniface,  message  to  Ed¬ 
ward  I.  from,  108  ;  claim  to  the 
kingdom  of  Scotland  by,  ib.  ; 
letter  from  Edward  I.  to,  109 


Pope  Clement  V.  issues  a  man¬ 
date  of  excommunication 
against  Bruce,  186 

Pope  John  XXII.,  issues  a  bull 
commanding  a  truce  between 
England  and  Scotland,  251  ; 
continues  to  act  in  interest  of 
Edward  II.,  271  ;  letter  to 
Edward  II.  from,  urging 
peace,  277  ;  letter  to  Edward 
II.  from,  regarding  consent 
to  Bruce’s  title  as  King  of 
Scotland,  294 

Pope  Nicholas  IV.  grants  dis¬ 
pensation  for  the  marriage  be¬ 
tween  Prince  Edward  and 
Princess  Margaret,  44 

Provins,  treaty  of,  103 

R 

Raa,  Rawe,  betrayer  of  Wallace, 
117 

Rachrin  (Rathlin),  Bruce  seeks 
shelter  in  the  island  of,  145 

Ragman  Roll,  no  record  of  de 
Balliol’s  reign  in,  77  ;  origin 
of  the,  79  ;  returned  by  Ed¬ 
ward  III.  to  the  Scots,  328 

Randolph,  Thomas,  see  Moray, 
Randolph 

“  Randolph’s  Field,”  209 

Red  Hall,  at  Berwick,  gallant 
defence  of,  74 

Richard  I.  grants  remission  of 
homage  to  William  the  Lion, 
32 

Richmond,  Earl  of,  appointed 
Warden  of  Scotland,  172  ;  op¬ 
poses  Bruce  in  Galway,  174 ; 
mission  to  the  Scots  by,  279  ; 
defeated  by  the  Scots  at 
Biland,  283 

Robert  II.,  birth  of,  230;  the 
Scottish  crown  settled  upon, 
260 

Rome,  Church  of,  enormous  po¬ 
litical  power  of,  325 

Rood,  the  Black,  returned  by 
Edward  III.  to  the  Scots,  328 


3§  4 


Index. 


Ros,  Sir  William  de,  a  claimant 
to  the  Scottish  throne,  57  ;  ap¬ 
pointed  joint  Warden  of  Scot¬ 
land,  186 

Roslyn,  battle  of,  in 
Roxburgh  Castle,  surrendered  to 
Edward  I.,  75  ;  plot  by  Scot¬ 
tish  leaders  to  surprise,  101  ; 
Parliament  at  Westminster 
makes  provision  for  the  safe 
custody  of,  123  ;  captured  by 
Douglas,  194 

Rufus,  William,  reconciliation 
between  Malcolm  Canmore 
and,  24 

Ryan,  Loch,  the  landing  of 
Bruce’s  brothers  at,  149 
Rymer,  Thomas,  the  Fcedera 
Anglicana  of,  13 

S 

Salisbury,  conference  between 
representatives  of  England, 
Scotland,  and  Norway  at,  42 
Scaithmoor,  battle  of,  234 
Scalacronica,  the  authorship  of, 
5  ;  mention  of  Wallace  in,  85 
Scone,  coronation  of  de  Balliol  at, 
68 ;  Edward  I.  removes  the 
Scottish  Coronation  Stone 
from,  79  ;  coronation  of  Bruce 
at,  131  ;  Scottish  Parliament 
at,  260,  274,  298  ;  David  II. 
crowned  at,  366 
Scotia,  the  ancient  kingdom  of, 
22 

Scotichronicon,  the,  8  ;  account 
of  events  in  Scotland  in,  after 
the  death  of  Princess  Mar¬ 
garet,  50 

Scotland,  early  history  of ,  22-37  ; 
first  consolidation  of  the  pres¬ 
ent  kingdom  of,  33  ;  degree  to 
which  the  ruling  class  had  be¬ 
come  alien  in,  34  ;  distractions 
by  the  barons,  51  ;  civil  dis¬ 
sension  in,  76  ;  scheme  of  Ed¬ 
ward  I.  for  the  government  of, 
122  ;  trade  with  the  Low 


Countries,  261  ;  laymen’s  plea 
to  the  Pope  on  behalf  of,  272 
Scots,  fusion  of  Piets  and,  28  ; 
antipathy  of,  to  the  Welshmen 
of  .Strathclyde,  ib. 

Scott,  Sir  Walter,  encomium  of 
Lord  Hailes  by,  13  ;  at  Dou¬ 
glas  Castle,  366 

Scutage,  remission  by  Edward  I. 

of,  due  by  Bruce,  128 
Seal,  the  Scottish,  broken  and 
sent  to  the  English  Treasury, 
68 

Selkirk,  foundation  charter  of  the 
monastery  of,  27  ;  meeting 
between  Bruce  and  English 
commissioners  at,  188 
Selkirk  Forest,  Wallace’s  retreat 
in,  83  ;  Sir  Robert  de  Keith 
appointed  warden  of,  102 
Seton,  Sir  Alexander  de,  rescues 
Bruce  at  Methven,  135  ;  coun¬ 
sels  Bruce  at  Bannockburn, 
211 

Seven  Earls,  the,  ancient  consti¬ 
tution  of,  27  ;  complaint  of,  52 
Sheriffs,  appointed  over  every 
county  in  Scotland,  123 
Sinclair,  William,  Bishop  of 
Dunkeld  defeats  English  forces 
in  Fife,  249  ;  excommunicated, 
272 

Siward,  Earl,  campaign  against 
Macbeth  by,  23 

Siward,  Sir  Richard  de,  accom¬ 
panies  Edward  I.  to  France, 
90 

Skene,  Mr.  W.  F.,  edition  of  the 
Gesta  Annalia  by,  9 
Soulis,  Sir  Nicholas  de,  a  claim¬ 
ant  to  the  Scottish  throne,  57 
“Sow,”  English  war-engine 
called  the,  265 

Spalding  Club,  edition  of  The 
Bnts  published  by  the,  6 
Spider,  story  of  Bruce  and  the, 
14-16 

Standard,  battle  of  the,  29 
St.  Andrews,  Bishop  of,  set 
Fraser  and  Lamberton 


Index. 


385 


St.  Andrews,  Parliament  held  by 
Edward  I.  at,  114 

State,  peculiar  social  and  politi¬ 
cal  relations  of  Church  and, 
142 

State  Papers,  jealously  guarded 
before  the  English  civil  war, 

12  ;  later  treatment  of,  ib. ; 
Parliament  and  the  editing  of, 

13 

St.  Bride,  patron  saint  of  Dou¬ 
glas,  359 

Steward,  James  the,  surrenders 
Roxburgh  Castle  to  Edward 
I.,  75  ;  sent  into  exile,  113  ; 
does  homage  to  Edward  I., 
142 

Steward,  Walter  the,  command 
of,  at  Bannockburn,  201  ;  cre¬ 
ated  a  knight  banneret  by 
Bruce,  213  ;  married  to  the 
daughter  of  Bruce,  230  ;  joint 
Guardian  of  Scotland  during 
Bruce’s  absence  in  Ireland, 
239  ;  in  command  at  Berwick, 
266  ;  at  the  battle  of  Biland, 
284  ;  death  of,  303 

Stevenson,  Mr.  Joseph,  edition 
of  the  Chronicle  of  Lanercost 

by,  4  . 

St.  Fillan,  Bruce  and  a  relic  of, 
210 

Stirling,  battle  of,  91  ;  siege  of 
the  castle  of,  114,  115,  x97  i 
Parliament  at  Westminster 
makes  provision  for  the  safe 
custody  of,  123 

Stoke  Goldington,  letter  of  Ed¬ 
ward  I.  from,  134 

Stone,  Scottish  Coronation,  re¬ 
moved  by  Edward  I.  to  West¬ 
minster,  79 

St.  Paul’s  Cathedral,  sentence  of 
excommunication  passed  upon 
Bruce  in,  135 

Stracathro,  de  Balliol’s  statement 
on  his  abdication  made  at,  77 

Strathord,  surrender  of  Comyn 
at,  112 

Surrey,  Earl  of,  see  Warenne 


T 

Tanistry,  Celtic  law  of,  63 
Temple- Liston,  English  camp  at, 

95 

Thorfinn,  Earl,  supports  the 
usurper  Macbeth,  23 
Torwood,  Bruce’s  army  in  the, 

199 

Turnberry,  meeting  of  nobles  at, 
to  discuss  the  Scottish  succes¬ 
sion,  41  ;  Bruce’s  landing  at, 
148 

Twenge,  Sir  Marmaduke  de,  in 
command  of  the  English  cav¬ 
alry  at  the  battle  of  Stirling, 
92  ;  released  unconditionally 
by  Bruce  after  the  battle  of 
Bannockburn,  225 
Tynedale,  a  raid  on,  72 
Tytler,  silent  regarding  Bruce’s 
claims  to  the  Scottish  throne, 
66 

U 

Ulster,  campaign  of  Bruce  in, 
237-240 

Ulster,  Earl  of,  commands  Eng¬ 
lish  troops  in  Ireland,  236 
Umfraville,  Gilbert  de,  Earl  of 
Angus,  demands  an  indemnity 
from  Edward  I.,  59 
Umfraville,  Sir  Ingelram  de, 
leads  a  foray  of  the  Scots,  101 ; 
appointed  sheriff  of  Roxburgh, 
102  ;  plots  against  Bruce,  152  ; 
appointed  joint  Warden  of 
Scotland,  186  ;  opinion  on  the 
Scottish  tactics  at  Bannock¬ 
burn,  215  ;  taken  prisoner  at 
Bannockburn,  220 
Upsettlington,  conference  be¬ 
tween  Edward  I.  and  Scottish 
nobles  at,  58 

V 

Valence,  Aymer  de,  Earl  of  Pem¬ 
broke,  appointed  Lieutenant 


386 


Index. 


of  Scotland,  133  ;  letters  from 
Edward  I.  to,  ib  — 134 ;  de¬ 
feats  Bruce  at  Methven,  135  ; 
reproached  by  Edward  I.,  15 1  ; 
defeated  by  Bruce  at  Loudon 
Hill,  164  ;  resigns  his  com¬ 
mand  in  Scotland,  172  ;  accom¬ 
panies  Edward  II.  in  his  flight 
from  Bannockburn,  221  ;  ap¬ 
pointed  Guardian  between 
Trent  and  Tweed,  226  ;  uni¬ 
form  ill-fortune  of,  233 
Vincenza,  Bishop  of,  Balliol  en¬ 
trusted  to  the  charge  of,  78 

W 

Wake,  Lord,  claim  for  restora¬ 
tion  of  lands  in  Scotland,  367  ; 
joins  the  Earl  of  March  in  in¬ 
vading  Scotland,  369 
Wallace,  Sir  Malcolm,  quarrels 
with  Sir  David  de  Graham  as 
to  the  estate  of  Sir  William 
Wallace,  101 

Wallace,  Sir  William,  first  pub¬ 
lic  record  of,  80 ;  youth  of, 
82  ;  legends  regarding  the 
powers  of,  84  ;  slays  the  King’s 
sheriff,  85  ;  in  favour  of  the 
restoration  of  de  Balliol,  87  ; 
defeats  the  English  at  Stirling, 
91  ;  recognised  as  the  national 
champion,  93 ;  assumes  the 
title  of  Governor  of  Scotland, 
95  ;  loses  his  ascendancy,  102  ; 
makes  a  journey  abroad,  103  ; 
is  imprisoned  by  King  Philip 
of  France,  ib. ;  efforts  of  Ed¬ 
ward  I.  to  capture,  116  ;  be¬ 
trayal  of,  1 17  ;  trial  of,  118  ; 
execution  of,  ib.;  charges  pre¬ 
ferred  against,  119 
Walsingham,  Thomas  of,  value 
of  the  writings  of,  3  ;  testi¬ 
mony  of,  as  to  Bruce’s  clem¬ 
ency,  224 

Wanton,  Sir  John  de,  defeated 
by  Douglas,  175 


Warenne,  John  de,  Earl  of  Sur¬ 
rey,  defeats  de  Balliol  at  Dun¬ 
bar,  75  ;  appointed  Governor 
of  Scotland,  82 

Wark,  muster  of  the  English 
army  at,  198 

Weardale,  campaign  of  Bruce  in, 
3i9 

Welbeck,  Abbot  of,  appointed 
to  convey  the  Maid  of  Norway 
to  England,  46 

Westminster,  letters  patent  of 
Balliol  deposited  at,  69  ;  Ed¬ 
ward  I.  summons  Balliol  to, 
ib. ;  Edward  I.  removes  the 
Scottish  Coronation  Stone  to, 
79  ;  Parliament  at,  122  ;  Scot¬ 
tish  commissioners  at  the  Par¬ 
liament  at,  ib.  ;  proposals  of 
English  and  Scottish  commis¬ 
sioners  at,  123 

Wigtownshire,  uncultivated  state 
of  Crown  lands  in,  40 

William  I.,  the  Lion,  fights  in 
the  army  of  Henry  II.,  32  ; 
conditions  of  homage  to  the 
English  King  agreed  upon  by, 
ib. 

William,  the  Conqueror,  compels 
Malcolm  Canmore  to  do  hom¬ 
age,  24 

William  Rufus,  reconciliation 
between  Malcolm  Canmore 
and,  24 

Wischard  (Wishart),  Robert, 
Bishop  of  Glasgow,  the  rising 
of  Wallace  inspired  by,  84  ; 
documentary  confession  6f 
Scottish  rebel  leaders  drawn 
up  by,  86  ;  imprisonment  of, 
108;  sentenced  to  exile,  113; 
supports  Bruce  as  King  of 
Scotland,  131 

Wymes  (Wemyss),  Sir  Michael 
de,  obnoxious  to  Edward  I., 
134 

Wyntoun,  Andrew  of,  the  metri¬ 
cal  chronicle  by,  9  ;  minute 
descriptions  by,  11  ;  compara¬ 
tive  accuracy  of,  ib. ;  apocry- 


Index. 


387 


phal  account  of  the  death  of 
Princess  Margaret  by,  49 

Y 

Yarmouth,  the  fitting  up  of  a 
ship  for  the  Maid  of  Norway 
at,  46 

York,  Archbishop  of,  opinion  of, 


as  to  proposals  of  peace  be¬ 
tween  England  and  Scotland, 
227  ;  holds  a  council  of  war  at 
Doncaster,  230 

York,  Parliament  of  Edward  II. 
at,  226 ;  English  army  at, 
259 ;  meeting  between  Eng¬ 
lish  and  Scottish  commission¬ 
ers  at,  323 


b* 


V 


Ji  Selection  from  the 
Catalogue  of 

G.  P.  PUTNAM'S  SONS 


Complete  Catalogues  sent 
on  application 


Heroes  of  the  Nations 


A  Series  of  biographical  studies  of  the  lives  and 
work  of  a  number  of  representative  historical  char¬ 
acters  about  whom  have  gathered  the  great  traditions 
of  the  Nations  to  which  they  belonged,  and  who  have 
been  accepted,  in  many  instances,  as  types  of  the 
several  National  ideals.  With  the  life  of  each  typical 
character  will  be  presented  a  picture  of  the  National 
conditions  surrounding  him  during  his  career. 

The  narratives  are  the  work  of  writers  who  are 
recognized  authorities  on  their  several  subjects,  and, 
while  thoroughly  trustworthy  as  history,  will  present 
picturesque  and  dramatic  ‘  stories  of  the  Men  and 

of  the  events  connected  with  them. 

To  the  Life  of  each  “Hero”  will  be  given  one  duo¬ 
decimo  volume,  handsomely  printed  in  large  type, 
provided  with  maps  and  adequately  illustrated  ac¬ 
cording  to  the  special  requirements  of  the  several 

subjects. 


For  full  list  of  volumes  see  next  page. 


HEROES  OF  THE  NATIONS 


NELSON.  By  W.  Clark  Russell. 
GUSTAVUS  ADOLPHUS.  By  C. 
R.  L.  Fletcher. 

PERICLES.  By  Evelyn  Abbott. 
THEODORIC  THE  GOTH.  By 
Thomas  Hodgkin. 

SIR  PHILIP  SIDNEY.  By  H.  R. 
Fox-Bourne. 

JULIUS  CAESAR.  By  W.  Warde 
Fowler. 

WYCLIF.  By  Lewis  Sergeant. 
NAPOLEON.  By  W.  O’Connor 
Morris. 

HENRY  OF  NAVARRE.  By  P. 
F.  Willert. 

CICERO.  By  J.  L.  Strachan- 
Davidson. 

ABRAHAM  LINCOLN.  By  Noah 
Brooks. 

PRINCE  HENRY  (OF  PORTU¬ 
GAL)  THE  NAVIGATOR. 
By  C.  R.  Beazley. 

JULIAN  THE  PHILOSOPHER. 

By  Alice  Gardner. 

LOUIS  XIV.  By  Arthur  Hassall, 
CHARLES  XII.  By  R.  Nisbet 
Bain, 

LORENZO  DE’  MEDICI.  By 
Edward  Armstrong. 

JEANNE  D’ARC.  By  Mrs.  Oli- 
phant . 

CHRISTOPHER  COLUMBUS.  By 
Washington  Irving. 


ROBERT  THE  BRUCE.  By  Sir 
Herbert  Maxwell. 

HANNIBAL.  By  W.  O’Connor 
Morris. 

ULYSSES  S.  GRANT.  By  William 
Conant  Church. 

ROBERT  E.  LEE.  By  Henry 
Alexander  White. 

THE  CID  CAMPEADOR.  By  H. 
Butler  Clarke. 

SALADIN.  By  Stanley  Lane- 
Poole. 

BISMARCK.  By  J.  W.  Headlam. 

ALEXANDER  THE  GREAT.  By 
Benjamin  I.  Wheeler. 

CHARLEMAGNE.  By  H.  W.  C. 
Davis. 

OLIVER  CROMWELL.  By 
Charles  Firth. 

RICHELIEU.  By  James  B.  Perkins. 

DANIEL  O’CONNELL.  By  Rob¬ 
ert  Dunlop. 

SAINT  LOUIS  (Louis  IX.  of 
France).  By  Frederick  Perry. 

LORD  CHATHAM.  By  Walford 
Davis  Green. 

OWEN  GLYNDWR.  By  Arthur 
G.  Bradley. 

HENRY  V.  By  Charles  L.  Kings- 
ford. 

EDWARD  I.  By  Edward  Jenks. 

AUGUSTUS  CAESAR.  By  J.  B. 
Firth. 


HEROES  OF  THE  NATIONS 


FREDERICK  THE  GREAT.  By 
W.  F.  Reddaway. 

WELLINGTON .  By  W .  O  ’Connor 
Morris. 

CONSTANTINE  THE  GREAT. 
By  J.  B.  Firth. 


MOHAMMED.  By  D.S.Margoliouth. 
CHARLES  THE  BOLD.  By 
Ruth  Putnam. 

WASHINGTON.  By  J.  A.  Harrison. 
WILLIAM  THE  CONQUEROR. 
By  F.  M.  Stenton. 


Other  volumes  in  preparation  are : 


MOLTKE.  By  Spencer  Wilkinson. 
JUDAS  MACCABEUS.  By  Israel 
Abrahams. 

SOBIESKI.  By  F.  A.  Pollard. 
ALFRED  THE  TRUTHTELLER. 

By  Frederick  Perry. 
FREDERICK  II.  By  A  L.  Smith. 


MARLBOROUGH.  By  C.  W.  C. 
Oman. 

RICHARD  THE  LION-HEARTED. 
By  T.  A.  Archer. 

WILLIAM  THE  SILENT.  By 
Ruth  Putnam. 

GREGORY  VII.  By  F.  Urquhar. 


New  York — G.  P.  PUTNAM’S  SONS,  Publishers — London 


1.  »  '  ■  11  '  '  " 

The  Story  of  the  Nations 


In  the  story  form  the  current  of  each  National  life 
is  distinctly  indicated,  and  its  picturesque  and  note¬ 
worthy  periods  and  episodes  are  presented  for  the 
reader  in  their  philosophical  relation  to  each  other 
as  well  as  to  universal  history. 

It  is  the  plan  of  the  writers  of  the  different  volumes 
to  enter  into  the  real  life  of  the  peoples,  and  to  bring 
them  before  the  reader  as  they  actually  lived,  labored, 
and  struggled — as  they  studied  and  wrote,  and  as 
they  amused  themselves.  In  carrying  out  this  plan, 
the  myths,  with  which  the  history  of  all  lands  begins, 
will  not  be  overlooked,  though  these  will  be  carefully 
distinguished  from  the  actual  history,  so  far  as  the 
labors  of  the  accepted  historical  authorities  have 
resulted  in  definite  conclusions. 

The  subjects  of  the  different  volumes  have  been 
planned  to  cover  connecting  and,  as  far  as  possible, 
consecutive  epochs  or  periods,  so  that  the  set  when 
completed  will  present  in  a  comprehensive  narrative 
the  chief  events  in  the  great  Story  of  the  Nations; 
but  it  is,  of  course,  not  always  practicable  to  issue 
the  several  volumes  in  their  chronological  order. 


For  list  of  volumes  see  next  page. 


THE  STORY  OF  THE  NATIONS 


GREECE.  Prof.  Jas.  A.  Harrison. 
ROME.  Arthur  Gilman. 

THE  JEWS.  Prof.  James  K.  Hos- 
mer. 

CHALDEA.  Z.  A.  Ragozin. 
GERMANY.  S.  Baring-Gould. 
NORWAY.  Hjalmar  H.  Boyesen. 
SPAIN.  Rev.  E.  E.  and  Susan 
Hale. 

HUNGARY.  Prof.  A.  Vdmbery. 
CARTHAGE.  Prof.  Alfred  J. 
Church. 

THE  SARACENS.  Arthur  Gil¬ 
man. 

THE  MOORS  IN  SPAIN.  Stanley 
Lane-Poole. 

THE  NORMANS.  Sarah  Ome 
Jewett. 

PERSIA.  S.  G.  W.  Benjamin. 
ANCIENT  EGYPT.  Prof.  Geo. 
Rawlinson. 

ALEXANDER’S  EMPIRE.  Prof. 
J.  P.  Mahaffy. 

ASSYRIA.  Z.  A.  Ragozin. 

THE  GOTHS.  Henry  Bradley. 
IRELAND.  Hon.  Emily  Lawless. 
TURKEY.  Stanley  Lane-Poole. 

MEDIA,  BABYLON,  AND  PER¬ 
SIA.  Z.  A.  Ragozin. 
MEDIAEVAL  FRANCE.  Prof.  Gus¬ 
tave  Masson. 

HOLLAND.  Prof.  J.  Thorold 
Rogers. 

MEXICO.  Susan  Hale. 
PHOENICIA.  George  Rawlinson. 


THE  HANSA  TOWNS.  Helen 
Zimmem. 

EARLY  BRITAIN.  Prof.  Alfred 
J.  Church. 

THE  BARBARY  CORSAIRS. 

Stanley  Lane-Poole. 

RUSSIA.  W.R.  Morfill. 

THE  JEWS  UNDER  ROME.  W. 
D.  Morrison. 

SCOTLAND.  John  Mackintosh. 
SWITZERLAND.  R.  Stead  and 
Mrs.  A.  Hug. 

PORTUGAL.  H.  Morse -Stephens, 

THE  BYZANTINE  EMPIRE.  C, 
W.  C.  Oman. 

SICILY.  E.  A.  Freeman. 

THE  TUSCAN  REPUBLICS.  Bella 
Duffy. 

POLAND.  W.  R.  Morfill. 
PARTHIA.  Geo.  Rawlinson. 
JAPAN.  David  Murray. 

THE  CHRISTIAN  RECOVERY 
OF  SPAIN.  H.  E.  Watts. 
AUSTRALASIA.  Greville  Tregar- 
then. 

SOUTHERN  AFRICA.  Geo.  M. 
Theal. 

VENICE.  Alethea  Weil. 

THE  CRUSADES.  T.  S.  Archer 
and  C.  L.  Kingsford. 

VEDIC  INDIA.  Z.  A.  Ragozin. 
BOHEMIA.  C.  E.  Maurice. 
CANADA.  J.  G.  Bourinot. 

THE  BALKAN  STATES.  William 
Miller. 


THE  STORY  OF  THE  NATIONS 


BRITISH  RULE  IN  INDIA.  R. 
W.  Frazer. 

MODERN  FRANCE.  Andr£  LeBon. 
THE  BRITISH  EMPIRE.  Alfred 
T.  Story.  Two  vols. 

THE  FRANKS.  Lewis  Sergeant. 
THE  WEST  INDIES.  Amos  K. 
Fiske. 

THE  PEOPLE  OF  ENGLAND. 
Justin  McCarthy,  M.P.  Two 
vols. 

AUSTRIA.  Sidney  Whitman. 
CHINA.  Robt.  K.  Douglass. 
MODERN  SPAIN.  Major  Martin 
A.  S.  Hume. 

MODERN  ITALY.  Pietro  Orsi. 
THE  THIRTEEN  COLONIES. 

Helen  A.  Smith.  Two  vols. 
WALES  AND  CORNWALL.  Owen 
M.  Edwards.  Net  $1.35. 
MEDIAEVAL  ROME.  Wm.  Miller. 


THE  PAPAL  MONARCHY.  Wm. 
Barry. 

MEDIAEVAL  INDIA.  Stanley 
Lane-Poole. 

BUDDHIST  INDIA.  T.  W.  Rhys- 
Davids. 

THE  SOUTH  AMERICAN  RE¬ 
PUBLICS.  Thomas  C.  Daw¬ 
son.  Two  vols. 

PARLIAMENTARY  ENGLAND. 
Edward  Jenks. 

MEDIAEVAL  ENGLAND.  Mary 
Bateson. 

THE  UNITED  STATES.  Edward 
Earle  Sparks.  Two  vols. 
ENGLAND,  THE  COMING  OF 
PARLIAMENT.  L.  Cecil  Jane. 
GREECE— EARLIEST  TIMES— 
A.D.  14.  E.  S.  Shuckburgh. 
ROMAN  EMPIRE,  B.C.  29-A.D. 
476.  N.  Stuart  Jones. 


. 

' 


C 


. 


Princeton  Theologica 


1  1012  01199  3583 


P 


t 


